I have an Ipod interfaced into my trucks stereo system. I use the Ipod (instead of CD's) almost exclusively.

For a while I have been happy with the sound quality. But I read about VBR, ripped a couple of songs and realized that VBR is much better than CBR (been encoding at 160).

I use Lame 3.97 and have it set to Variable Bit Rate V2, Joint Stereo and Old (method)

Can someone explain to me the different methods Old vs New vs Default. and which is better and why

Whats the difference between Joint Stereo and Stereo and why is one prefered over the other.

I have an Ipod interfaced into my trucks stereo system. I use the Ipod (instead of CD's) almost exclusively.

I am curious. What setup do you use in your truck? And FM modulation or direct connect?

For a while I have been happy with the sound quality. But I read about VBR, ripped a couple of songs and realized that VBR is much better than CBR (been encoding at 160). I use Lame 3.97 and have it set to Variable Bit Rate V2, Joint Stereo and Old (method). Can someone explain to me the different methods Old vs New vs Default. and which is better and why?

Another heated debate! I use LAME VBR ripped at 192min as a compromise. It begets smaller files but retains decent quality. Some peeps hold 192vbr as the new CD quality standard.

Whats the difference between Joint Stereo and Stereo and why is one prefered over the other?
For Joint-Stereo vs Stereo: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....c=30637&hl=

I personally would not consider FM Modulation as an interface.

The interface I use is a Kenwood KCA iP500. This is a direct connection to my Kenwood stereo. I control the Ipod through the stereos controls. In fact, the Ipod is treated the same as a changer. Playlists are treated as discs and songs are treated as tracks. The interface also keeps the ipod charged.

Anyway thank you for your time and responce, I'm just trying to figure all this out.

I will be upgrading my vehicle, so I was curious of your selection and why. My new ride will have built-in iPod connections with controls on the steering wheel directly to the head, which displays all iPod menus. I've never liked FM mod, but it works as a "get-by" till then. We've all been at the "figuring" stage. You'll find good info in this forum. Good luck!

If I may make a couple suggestions, you should switch to the new vbr method (--vbr-new) which is recommended for Lame 3.97. This is mentioned in the list of recommended lame settings sticky in this forum. Also, you may want to try a lower quality setting and see how it sounds to you. In listening tests a while back V5 performed quite nicely. In a car with all the ambient noise, I'd suspect V5 would be great. Plus, you'd be able to fit more music on your iPod as well.

I'll switch the method to new and test a few songs, but I think I'll stay with setting V2 for now. I am a self proclaimed audio nut.

My trucks interior was completely removed when it was new, Dynomat was applied to everything, including the roof, then the interior was put back. There is a bare minimum of road noise inside the truck

The factory sound system was replced a few days later.

Anyway I thank all for their responces

I would keep it as V2 new. You may use your ipod with headphones sometimes, and i think you would appreciate the better quality then. Have you considered mp3gain to prevent clipping? I found this stopped my old ipod distorting at higher volumes with the eq on.

FM is bad.. I have bought a expensive mod for my MP3 player and it is supposed to work up to 30 ft. Well, it barely even works in my car. I live in a rural area so we don't have many radio stations to interfere with it. It just sucks.

Also, audio quality will never be as good as it would be witha direct connection. I believe no matter what FM mods always lowpass the audio.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

May I ask why you're using MP3 and not AAC? AAC should provide a better quality:file size ratio.

If you use Nero AAC, the tests on HA show will get better results than LAME mp3.

From what I've read in the HA ABX tests, that depends. At low bit rates (64, 128) and Constant bit rate, the listening test indicate that AAC and LAME encoded mp3's are equal, with a slight quality edge possibly going to AAC.

However, if you use variable bit rate (VBR) and up the max bit rate slightly to 192 (V3/4) or 256 (V2), the ABX tests indicate that LAME mp3 win hands down, while taking up less space than comparable encoded AAC's. Though admittedly, these files are somewhat larger than the 128 CBR mp3 or AAC.

Bottom line: you can get demonstrably better sound from a LAME VBR mp3 while paying only a slight size penalty.

edited to strike incorrect statements

What test showed this? Once you get into these higher bitrates (160-192 kbps) all of the modern encoders (Lame, Vorbis, AAC) are transparent to most all people for most all music.

Also if you're looking for best quality using LAME, you're best served to just stick with the V presets and omit the additional switches. These presets have been finely tuned by the LAME devs to get the maximum quality at a given bitrate/preset. Think of it this way, if tweaking a certain switch could improve quality, wouldn't the devs just include it in the preset?

P.S. my signature is sarcastic.

edit: clarification

There is no recent test that has shown that LAME is better than AAC at higher bitrates. Or at any bitrate, for that matter.

JDM: you are correct, FM lowpasses at 15-15.7KHz.

You're right. I just read the most recent 192 yest. Older tests showed LAME mp3 on top. But the most recent test shows AAC is better at 192 as long as you use Nero, not iTunes to make them.

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....howtopic=46126#

Finally 192 kbit/s listening test has finished with the following results:

1. Ogg Vorbis, AAC+, AAC LC and WMA 9.1 showed the best audio quality
2. MP3 and MPC are second
3. AAC LC from iTunes is last due to the bug

I see you're using SoundExpert tests as a reference. If you read all the threads about SoundExpert you'll find that the majority of HA regulars (including several expert members) identify major faults with the SE testing methodology and as a result find the conclusions that can be drawn from them invalid.

In short, stick with public listening test results, or personal first hand ABX or ABC/HR (that means yours, and not somebody else's).

Those are the most recent 192 tests on HA that I am aware of. Is there another 192 test with recent results?

Yes there are flaws in the test. There are flaws in EVERY test. BUT, rather than throw the baby out the the bathwater, perhaps we can take it for what it is - a pretty good public comparison.

The problem of course with personal tests is that you have no idea how your personal comparison stacks up with anyone else's. And a general comparison is what is needed answering the question: what encoding format should I choose?

So far the answer seems to be that at 128, the major formats are roughly equal, and at 192 some may be more equal than others ;-)

That statement alone should give you pause.

I use a homemade solution in my car (an opel), which has a factory panasonic built opel branded system with a cd changer. By reading some obscure japanese site through google translator I managed to get a pinout for the proprietary 13 pin cable between the changer and head unit, and tapped the audio cables and a 12 volt switched power cable, which I connected to a home made dock connector which I made from the plug on my iPod's USB cable (I use the firewire one for syncing with PC, nice of them to include 2).

I also fitted a switch to switch between iPod audio and the cd changer (the cd changer does sound slightly better, but for the most part the difference between the iPod and CD quality is unnoticeable.)

The hardest part was soldering to the tiny pins on the iPod's plug, they are unbelievably small, and the plastic around them melts if you hesitate for even a moment.

Edit: On the topic of audio compression, I use Nero's AAC encoder at Q0.50, yielding about 175kbps according to foobar2000.