Hello

This is my first post on the forum, so I hope folks will understand my inexperience. I have read many posts here and on the EAC forum at digital-inn,
since I am using EAC/LAME.

My install went smoothly and I am liking the results very much. I installed the 3.90.3 version of LAME and having read the posts in this forum can understand why it is the right choice for me at this time.

However, I did come accross a reference to the 3.96.1 version of LAME as being a bit better when encoding at 128 kps. I followed links to this site

http://ff123.net/cbr128.html

But I also noticed, the above refrences earlier versions of LAME.

I am hoping to find the most current info regarding the best presets or command lines for 128kps and LAME 3.96.1 ?

Ideally, I would like to use BOTH the 3.90.3 and 3.96.1 versions of LAME. This way I could still take advantage of the presets that work best with 3.90.3, while using 3.96.1 for the 128kps.

At this point file size is a concern for me, so I will likely intially encode mostly at 128kps and for this it sounds like 3.96.1 is the choice?

However. I would also like to use 3.90.3 and the recommended presets for times when I am able or wanting to encode at a higher bit rate.

I am wondering if perhaps I could use the Lame.EXE (3.90.3) and the Lame.DLL 3.96.1 in EAC?. I could save profiles and select which one I want, by selecting a different profile. Or possibly remaning one of the Lame.EXE files, use both as EXE
and just save different profiles for easier deployment of whatever method I select when encoding..ie 3.96.1 for lower bit rates and 3.90.3 for higher bit rates?

Thank you

Randy

Even though 3.90.3 is officially recommended here, the consensus is that the presets in 3.96.1 do not regress in quality. So using 3.96.1 is not a problem if you want to encode with aps.

For your 128kbps encoding needs, I would really take a look at the newer codecs (such as OGG & AAC) if quality is of main concern.

I would simply try LAME 3.96 in ABR mode.

SebastianG

Thanks Guys

I am going to try 3.96 in ABR.

As far as ogg and aac, both seem interesting and worthy of testing. Unfortunately, my player does not support these formats. So my only real choices aside from LAME are MP3pro or WMA, I tested some MP3pro songs and do appreciate the small file sizes at really low bit rates (64kbps) but the sound is just not the same as LAME -asp.

Thanks
Randy

You might also want to consider the -V5 switch. This will produce vbr files around 128k and quality is higher than cbr/abr.

Thanks Shadowking

I am new to this so I hope you don't mind my asking, Is V5 an available setting when the LAME.DLL file is used instead of the EXE version?

Thank you
Randy

no...it doesn't matter if you use lame.dll or lame.exe

LAME 3.96.1 has known problems in its ABR/CBR mode (compared to 3.90.3), use it with caution.

But still managing to win the mp3 128kbps test

That was LAME 3.96.1 VBR mode (-V5 --athaa-sensitivity 1), which seems to be the undisputed king of mp3 @ 128kb/s . By the way, will the ATH issue that was adressed in this test by using the "--athaa-sensitivity 1" switch be corrected in the next stable build?

I think Gabriel ist talking about this test.

You are indeed correct dev0, I thought that -V5 was used for that test, however it wasn't used until the corresponding multiformat test. My apologies Gabriel.

Thanks everyone for helping me out.

I am using the "Use external program for compression" in EAC.

I would like to use VBR for128kbps, but am not sure how to modify my command line in EAC to achieve this.

My current command line looks like this

"%l--alt-preset %r%l%h--alt-preset standard%h %s %d"

And I am hoping that someone can help me out.

Thank you
Randy

let's assume you use LAME 3.96.1 you have some options.

You can either use --preset standard %s %d, however this will result ~196kbps in average but is the best choice.

If don't want to go this high, you could use --preset 128 %s %d or even better at that (128kbps) bitrate -V 5 %s %d

I hope this helps

Thanks JoJo

My old command line was setup using 3.90.3, the %r passes the bitrate from the EAC pick list. I also like the %l and %h switches so I can easily select the "Low" or "High" quality radio button in EAC.

"%l--alt-preset %r%l%h--alt-preset standard%h %s %d"

I read in other posts that with 3.96.1 the "alt" is no longer need. I assume this is correct?

I also want to use the VBR as you suggest, but am confused about the proper syntax. Is it "--preset -V5 %s %d" or just plain "-V5 %s%d"

Also I notice some dashes are "--" two and some are "-" single dash?

I am thinking my new complete command line will look like one of the following:

"%l--preset -V5%l%h--preset standard%h %s %d

OR

"%l-V5%l%h--preset standard%h %s %d

I guess at this point I am just confused as to wether -V5 is a preset itself or a switch? and am trying to get the syntax down.

Thanks
Randy

drop all your extra settings and use it as I've suggested you. They don't make any sense...

You can't use the %r switch anymore except for that setting --preset %r %s %d
I strongly recommend you using LAME 3.96.1...you can't use -V 5 %s %d otherwise! Just --alt-preset %r %s %d would work... + --alt-preset standard %s %d

Thank you Jojo

Didn't something go wrong with the CBR tunings in 3.96.1, and that 3.90.3 may be better for CBR ?

So is -V5 --athaa-sensitivity 1 better than -V5 alone?

There were some tests on LAME done before the last Multiformat test which showed that there is some sort of problem with the ATH sensitivity in 3.96.1 and it was shown that adding --athaa-sensitivity 1 improved the quality of the output (at least for -V 5 which was all that was tested at this time). Gabriel explained that 1 should not be a good value for this switch and said that this meant there was some sort of bug involving the ATH settings. So I guess the answer is yes, for now -V 5 --athaa-sensitivity 1 is better then just -V 5, but I suspect (and am hoping) that this will be fixed in the next stable version of LAME. For all I know it could already be fixed in the latest alpha build.

who cares about CBR? All switches I posted either use VBR or ABR....which is far better than CBR...