I've red some posts from which I've concluded:
Thera are some samples where -aps fails.
In many cases (all???) it's enough to use -aps -Z (only ns1) instead.
Is this conclusion right?
Morover, is it good idea to use -aps -Z always when we want be extra safe? (for example female voice)
I'm not an expert, so please be kind

Greets

Do not use -Z with any of the --alt-presets (standard, extreme, insane). These presets use ns1 by default and adding -Z to the commandline will force them to use ns2 which is not the correct mode for nspsytune.

Actually the only preset that uses ns1 by default is --alt-preset insane. Some of the higher bitrate cbr/abr presets do also.

Having said that, I wouldn't use -Z even with the presets that use ns2 unless you actually come across some sort of audible problem, which should be pretty rare.

If size is not such an issue, I'd use APS -Z, because it will then use ns1 which is safer.. But as said, file size will be bigger.

Like Dibrom said, NS1 is NOT the default noise-shaping type of APS, it uses NS2, but APS can use NS1 in some occasions dynamically. But the dynamic change does not always work correctly (see the APS problem sample thread). In order to be very safe, it's a good idea to use -Z with APS if increased size is not problem. Same goes for --alt-preset extreme, but not for insane.

I give up. :'(

What Dibrom and JohnV said is correct for LAME 3.90.2. However, newer versions of LAME have different behavior (because of Takehiro's psymodel changes I presume), i.e. NS1 is the default for standard and extreme and appending -Z makes this NS2. This is why I always add --verbose --verbose whenever I use LAME so I know exactly what's going on because things may change from version to version.

Though I was correct in specifics, I was wrong in effect because you should only be using 3.90.2 for APS/APE/API.

What are you talking about?? Wrong again.. Latest 3.93.1 functions similarly regarding noise-shaping type as 3.90.2 when it comes to --alt-presets. So the above what Dibrom and I said is true for 3.90.2, 3.91, 3.92, 3.93, 3.93.1...

Only alphas (which are meant for testing anyway and not for serious encoding), behave differently at the moment, but of course alpha behaviour can change anytime.

Mithrandir: you are not recommending the use of an alpha version to someone with a post count of 19 I hope...

You KNOW that alpha versions are for testing, don't you?

Naah, Mithrandir is clearly recommending 3.90.2, but he has probably tested alphas himself quite a lot recently and thus confused somewhat..

Confused, yes; it's been tricky to keep track of how each version works. Since I think that 3.94 may eventually be the new standard my mind has been too focussed on it.

I recommend that the forthcoming versions of LAME add a new "--ns" switch, especially if the noiseshaping mode logic has changed. If you look at 3.94a8, standard uses ns1, extreme uses ns2 and insane uses ns1 ("uses" means that's what the console output reports). -Z will make things even more complicated. Of course, alphas are alphas but hopefully when 3.94 final is out, this whole noiseshaping handling will be cleared up. I don't know if we can retire "-Z" because it may break some people's stored commandlines but it has really overdone its welcome.

guys im releatively new to --aps and -z stuff. I recently got an mp3 cd player and sixz doesnt matter that much so i would be fine using --aps -z , but which bitrate would that output??? also, since the well know quality problems in recetn lame versions is it ok to settle in v3.92??

thnx in advance

nm, just read other thread and im gonna use lame 3.90.2, thnx anyway

It is exactly what I mean. I am happy that such an authority confirmed my presumptions.
Actually it's rather obvious because the idea of using -Z is derived from your posts JohnV

Let's go further. Maybe -aps -Z could be some alternative to -ape ?
I am happy with overall quality of aps and I don't think I need -ape but using only NS1 looks like a good option to improve especially difficult samples.

The same could be with -ape -Z instead -api...

Any comments appreciated.

Greets

No comments?! So here is my comment

I've made some tests with -aps and -aps -Z
I was suprised the the difference in size is really small !!! The same goes for -ape and -ape -Z.
Conclusion? For me a few percent bigger file for my sense of safety is fully acceptable. (my english is crappy here, but I hope it is understable)

Greets

I agree. The size increase given by -z is small although encoding time does increase by a small margin as well.