Hi 2 ALL!!!


Till now I prefered the STEREO setting (for Lame -ms) then I think this is a real stereo sound.

My questions:
1. Which stereo settings U (Experts) use for MP3 encoding?
2. Is this depending the music style?
3. What U win / lose if U take S / JS?
4. What is the future?

I am now on the crossroads (S / JS) so please help me to choose the RIGHT way!

Thank you for U opinion / help!

CU
Bobby Black

Please query the Hydrogenaudio FAQ first before you ask such basic questions.

Since you are german, this site might also help you: http://www.audiohq.de/index.php?showtopic=16

THANK YOU Frank! - 4 U Hints!

But if U readed my 4 questions realy U see I want only know what the EXPERTS used NOW 4 encoding and why!!!

CU
Bobby Black

The links from the FAQ that Frank provided answer your questions perfectly. Did you actually read them ?

Also, if the FAQ clearly states that joint-stereo is better, why would the "experts" not use it ?

Apparently, you're not new to this board (when I look at your join date), so I'm wondering why you never saw any previous discussion about joint stereo. It has been discussed many times before. Also, joint stereo is used in the alt-presets (you do use the alt-presets, do you ?).

Finally, may I kindly ask you to put a bit more effort into writing your posts, and don't exaggerate with the abbreviations (U instead of "you", 4 instead of "for", etc.) ? It makes your posts harder to read. (TOS #10 also mentions something similar)

The 'experts' use Joint-Stereo. This is because they know what Joint Stereo does in LAME.

Contrary to popular n00b belief, Joint Stereo does not mux your left and right stereo signals together into a single stream, thus degrading them.
It is actually an intelligent mode which, while encoding, finds the audio frames that have very similar or exact left-right information, then encodes them as mid/side frames. Those frames that have significantly different stereo difference between L and R are still encoded in true stereo.

This Joint Stereo mode is effectively lossless; as long as you do not use pseudo-surround stuff like stereo-field expansion or something, your ears NEVER hear the difference.

Why use Joint Stereo? Well, encoding mid/side frames saves bitrate, and you can get either smaller file sizes, or equal file sizes with higher quality.

(This post may explain things a little inaccurately, so maybe the real experts better clarify)

Also, please don't crosspost, and post your topic in the appropriate forum.

SORRY SORRY SORRY my fault!

never ever use stereo unless you're crazy like me question that and you'll get my longass digression about multichannel audio which only a few people here like to use. so do as i say and not as i do, and use joint stereo.

Joint-Stereo ? Does that refer to M/S Stereo or Intensity Stereo ?
As far as I know, there is still some limitation with Intensity Stereo.. even
though IS is more efficient that M/S stereo..

Then again, M/S stereo isn't actually lossless compared to actual stereo coding ! It seemed that the M/S stereo coding artifacts are centered.. compared to normal stereo coding, resulting in better subjective quality

M/S Stereo (actually, switching between normal and M/S stereo). Lame doesn't even support Intensity Stereo.

No. Using "joint stereo" (default with --alt-presets) enables lame to choose if channels must be encoded separately (L/R) or M/S must be used. Lame with the --alt-presets does a good job on deciding this. That's why using "joint stereo" with lame is supposed to improve things over -m s in much more cases than the other way round.