I got this from
CODE
http://jthz.com/mp3/
Is this better that --alt-vbr preset ? Whats the differences between the two.
Thanks
Full Version: What About This Switch ?
--lowpass 19.7 -V3 --vbr-mtrh -q0 -b96 -Z -X0 --scale 0.99
I got this from
Is this better that --alt-vbr preset ? Whats the differences between the two.
Thanks
I got this from
Is this better that --alt-vbr preset ? Whats the differences between the two.
Thanks
You should probably just use --alt-preset standard
--alt-presets has internal code-tweaks that can not be enabled by any switches.
--alt-presets has internal code-tweaks that can not be enabled by any switches.
Another one??
QUOTE (jonMEGA @ Oct 23 2002 - 05:21 PM)
I got this from
CODE
http://jthz.com/mp3/
Don't believe them.
There's too many websites, r3mix most prominent, that are suggesting outdated and sometimes plain stupid command lines.
I hope someday that simple google searches regarding mp3 quality, as well as other encoders will turn up hydrogen audio first.
Such searches always point to r3mix now. The problem with this is obvious.
Someone told me once about something called Google bombing where you could make your link appear first in a google search.
Anyone know how to do this? Probably it will be best to wait until Dibrom gets things set with the FAQ or newbie forum.
I hope someday that simple google searches regarding mp3 quality, as well as other encoders will turn up hydrogen audio first.
Such searches always point to r3mix now. The problem with this is obvious.
Someone told me once about something called Google bombing where you could make your link appear first in a google search.
Anyone know how to do this? Probably it will be best to wait until Dibrom gets things set with the FAQ or newbie forum.
What is that command line trying to achieve? Transparency? You are much better off with alt-preset standard because it has been tuned and tweaked by double-blind listening tests. The command line that you list is unstable and unknown and will probably require almost as much space as alt-preset standard. It's not worth the risk.
Anyone else notice this comes from Julius's site?
Hehe..
I think this quote says quite a bit:
QUOTE
So you're the experts?
We're not the real heroes as far as LAME goes; We don't do actual coding for LAME (yet), although our meddling and 'interference' is appreciated by those who do. Being frequent users, we do many tests with it based on personal taste and personal interpretations, and we can in no way be held responsable for bad results on - for example - heavy metal music encoding using the latest alpha version, since we don't really use it on that genre. THIS webpage is maintained by us, Hens and Julius. We both use LAME and MP3 professionally, and the settings mentioned on this page are NOT up for discussion, they are more than sufficient for the audio WE encode. We like to emphasize that you should NOT rely on any of the so-called "test results" available on the www; There are some very slick charlatans busy spreading lies about audio quality issues involving LAME, MP3 and VBR. Also be aware that there's a lot of money involved in MP3 (and MP3 encoding); We've bumped into carefully thought-out misleading scams by commercial competitors of LAME. Make sure you check different LAME settings YOURSELF, do not blindly follow comments written by self-appointed 'experts', especially in cases where they seem to have too much time for the issues at hand. The only source of truth for LAME is the MP3enc Mailinglist
We're not the real heroes as far as LAME goes; We don't do actual coding for LAME (yet), although our meddling and 'interference' is appreciated by those who do. Being frequent users, we do many tests with it based on personal taste and personal interpretations, and we can in no way be held responsable for bad results on - for example - heavy metal music encoding using the latest alpha version, since we don't really use it on that genre. THIS webpage is maintained by us, Hens and Julius. We both use LAME and MP3 professionally, and the settings mentioned on this page are NOT up for discussion, they are more than sufficient for the audio WE encode. We like to emphasize that you should NOT rely on any of the so-called "test results" available on the www; There are some very slick charlatans busy spreading lies about audio quality issues involving LAME, MP3 and VBR. Also be aware that there's a lot of money involved in MP3 (and MP3 encoding); We've bumped into carefully thought-out misleading scams by commercial competitors of LAME. Make sure you check different LAME settings YOURSELF, do not blindly follow comments written by self-appointed 'experts', especially in cases where they seem to have too much time for the issues at hand. The only source of truth for LAME is the MP3enc Mailinglist
Emphasis added.
Basically, Julius was around on r3mix.net during the dm-preset days. Myself and others were doing some great tuning work, and unfortunately for some odd reason, Julius didn't like this. I guess maybe because he wasn't a part of it or something. Anyway, he started a lot of flame wars, proved that he couldn't hear artifacts worth a damn, and basically made an ass out of himself. Then he retreated from the forum and created the website you found this setting on. This quote that he added happened directly after he left r3mix.net, and at one point in time he actually listed myself, CiTay, cd-rw.org, and I think ff123 on his page as "bad people" or something like that because he was basically bitter over the whole thing. Of course, our names were mispelled... just a childish jab from J since he couldn't really do anything else
Anyway, this guy doesn't know the first thing about quality.. I wouldn't trust a single sentence on his site. He doesn't believe in blind testing, and he thinks that anyone else coming up with different results from him is obviously lying (the cause of the whole problem on r3mix.net actually).
This is just another example of one of the sites out there which ends up confusing newbies. Only this one is even worse than r3mix.net...
Oh, and btw.. one of the best tests for knowing whether or not someone really understand what the switches they are using do, is by how they use -Z.
In J's command line -Z is specificed but withoug nspsytune. This will do the opposite of what he's trying to do (disable noise shaping 2 and switch to type 1). Noise shaping 2 on it's own without special tweaks like the --alt-presets use, has problems. Most people don't understand how the switch works though. It's clear that in J's case that he just did the old copy/paste routine...
QUOTE (kennedyb4 @ Oct 23 2002 - 05:58 PM)
Probably it will be best to wait until Dibrom gets things set with the FAQ or newbie forum.
Or lets establish a MP3 command line forum
It's really necessary to put this FAQ online.
QUOTE (theduke @ Oct 23 2002 - 02:12 PM)
It's really necessary to put this FAQ online.
Yes, I agree. What we're waiting for right now is for some particular bits of software (which we will be using for the documentation infrastructure) to be finalized. It should happen soon now... but I'm not going to give any firm date
QUOTE (Dibrom @ Oct 23 2002 - 01:02 PM)
This quote that he added happened directly after he left r3mix.net, and at one point in time he actually listed myself, CiTay, cd-rw.org, and I think ff123 on his page as "bad people" or something like that because he was basically bitter over the whole thing. Of course, our names were mispelled... just a childish jab from J since he couldn't really do anything else
He didn't mention me, but he did have bAdDuDeX on the list of persona non-grata. I distinctly remember his name for you: Dubris
lol
ff123
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.