Hi,

Didn't know where else to post, but i just had to write about a recent encounter when trying to convince someone to actually ABX music instead of asserting that he can hear a clear difference in mp3 vbr ~192 vs cbr 320.

Went something like this:
Him: I only use 320 cbr as I want the best quality and can't stand the quality of lower bitrate files.
Me: cbr 320 is a waste of space compared to vbr - if you're that interested in quality you might as well use flac. You probably won't hear any difference between any of those. Have you ABXd them - you need to have a properly blinded test to really see if you hear a difference.
Him: Believe me, there's a huge difference in quality easily heard on my friends equipment.
Me: Ok, then we agree to disagree. However, just for fun, when you have the time, try out ABXing the files vbr vs 320 cbr. You might be surprised of the results - I know I was as I too heard a clear difference.
Him: I will, thanks for the advice!

I knew from the start that I probably couldn't convince him the "hard" way. I was happy with his reply - now I'm just going to see if he really does it and if he will ever get back to me about the results.

If I can get even 1 converted from the dark-side of audiophile nonsense, I'm happy.

You do have to be careful. Around here, some folks CAN ABX cbr320 and vbr 192. The --preset standard flag was created so that an mp3 was transparent to most people, however some people here have an ear tuned specifically to mp3 artifacts, and they can ABX CBR 320.

Also, if someone is completely unaware of ABX, you'll have to explain to them how to use it. Showing them is even better. Otherwise, the probability of them actually converting is low (it HAS happened, but it's still low).

This is what often happens when one tries to convert people from believing nonsense.

Oh yes, I'm well aware of that. However, I'm happy if he is willing to even try, even though the end result could very well be that he would be able to notice the difference. At least he may even realize, that it actually isn't such a drastic difference and not as easy to spot as he thought it was (regarding his comment that he can't stand the quality below 320kbps).


Oh I did give him some pointers and referred here to check that he is using acceptable encoding options. And naturally I'm willing to help him set it up properly.

And I have quite much (unfortunate) experience in people believing in woowoo stuff (homeopathy, psychics, etc), so I will not be surprised if this doesn't do any good - I was just happy he was even willing to try (and wanted to share that info here), as even that usually proves to be an obstacle that is rarely overcome.

I was also happy that it didn't have to go to tedious arguments and all, which firm beliefs usually lead to.

Who are those people who can ABX all samples at CBR 320? Do you have any names?

I don't personally think it is possible with some general songs until I'm proven otherwise. With crafted samples for the purpose it might be.

However, I think he meant that as a reference to vbr ~192 vs cbr 320 (as that was my original request for the person who claimed who can't stand anything below 320cbr) and that might be possible with some problem samples.

I recently had the experience on AVSforum of trying to convert an mp3-hater into someone who would accept the possibility of good-sounding mp3s. I pointed him at all the usual links here (e.g. recommended LAME compiles and settings, ABX software, secure ripping) to encourage him to try it for himself, but he wasn't budging, so I posted an mp3 I made, plus the .wav file source, and suggested he download them and ABX them. I let him choose the song to encode, as I already knew he likes some of the same music I did. I also let him pick the encode rate (he was convinced that even 'insane' would sound bad).

Well, after he downloaded the mp3 -- he requested CBR at 320kbps, though I told him VBR at 192 would probably be quite sufficient -- he didn't even bother to ABX it; he was so blown away by how good it sounded, he was 'instantly' converted.

Perhaps something similar would work for your friend. Maybe he's just never heard a high-quality VBR encoded mp3. Or make him two mp3s of the same source, one at his preferred rate, and one at 192 VBR.
Put them on a disc and ask him to tell them apart without knowing which is which.

A similar thing happened with one friend in the past. He didn't like mp3s, and one time we were at my place and the topic came up and I asked him if he realized we have been listening to mp3s the whole evening. He was surprised and asked me how I can make them sound so good when he gets only garbage.

I set up eac + lame for him and he's been a happy camper since.

I think many who think mp3s are bad think so simply because they've been subjected to some questionable "quality" encodes at one time or another. (the friend was using some quite old fraunhofer encoder with limited bitrates, if I remember correctly - it was some years ago)

Yes, I also was actually thinking about something along these lines.

Could someone please give me a link to a recent page where I can find "the usual set of links".

Or if someone has the time, could he/she please give me a quick overview of the software and the places where I can get the correct settings for that software; to create top quality mp3's.

nb. Please don't tell me to search the internet, the number of "relevant" pages is astounding and most contain outdated information.

Well, a good start would be http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/

I'm sure many will be happy to help you if you have some specific questions.

Thanks, I suppose; I looked at the wiki and it's wonderfull. But's is similar to a compendium of man pages. It's a fine gathering of information about the inner workings of different encoding techniques, a summation of existing software and their options, etc.. But I can’t see the forest through the trees.
And a search on the forum is ..., well the words mp3, encoding and CD are not very uncommon.
There must be a guide someone has posted on his or her website about the optimal way to convert the music on a CD to a collection of mp3's.
If there is no such thing, I'll just keep using what I am now .

Does this guide help you?
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=EAC_and_Lame

Thanks,

I had clicked some of the links in the guides section, f.e. choosing the best codec etc., but I somehow missed this one.
I'll follow these guidlines and see what the result is.

Thanks,

I ripped a CD following the provided instructions, i.e. using EAC and Lame 3.97 at 224mbps VBR and compared it with a set of mp3's, 256mbps CBR, retrieved from the internet ( I know ..., but I like to know what I buy ) and the difference is big. The sound is much clearer.
I randomized both folders inside a playlist and I had no problem picking out the new ones.

So Thanks

so btw I had a similiar experience, always thought, that I can hear clearly the diff between flac and
192 VBR lame.

Well using the ABX tool at Fb2k I proved myself wrong. So there are indeed psycho effects involved. At least with my ears