Using the V preset, above V7, lame resample the 32 khz...
Is it possible to avoid this resampling and stay at 44.1 while using the optimisation of the V presets?
Cheers,
Full Version: small mp3 @ 44.1
I'd like to compress an mp3 at a low bitrate.
Using the V preset, above V7, lame resample the 32 khz...
Is it possible to avoid this resampling and stay at 44.1 while using the optimisation of the V presets?
Cheers,
Using the V preset, above V7, lame resample the 32 khz...
Is it possible to avoid this resampling and stay at 44.1 while using the optimisation of the V presets?
Cheers,
QUOTE(marcan @ Dec 13 2007, 09:42) 
I'd like to compress an mp3 at a low bitrate.
Using the V preset, under V5, lame resample the 24 khz...
Is it possible to avoid this resampling and stay at 44.1 while using the optimisation of the V presets?
Cheers,
I think the switch is --resample 44100
Edit: Of course, if there is a lowpass filter of less than 12 kHz then there is no reason not to resample, other than possible compatibility issues.
Are you sure that it is resampling to 24 kbits and not 32?
LAME normaly does not resample to 24 kHz at V5. It's likely that the original input file already has a samplerate of 24 kHz.
QUOTE(robert @ Dec 13 2007, 05:51)
LAME normaly does not resample to 24 kHz at V5. It's likely that the original input file already has a samplerate of 24 kHz.
Sorry, it starts to resample at V7 @ 32 khz.Anyway the question is the same.
I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to do, but as pdq said, adding --resample 44.1 to your commandline may help you.
QUOTE(pdq @ Dec 13 2007, 05:48)
QUOTE(marcan @ Dec 13 2007, 09:42)
I'd like to compress an mp3 at a low bitrate.
Using the V preset, under V5, lame resample the 24 khz...
Is it possible to avoid this resampling and stay at 44.1 while using the optimisation of the V presets?
Cheers,
I think the switch is --resample 44100
Edit: Of course, if there is a lowpass filter of less than 12 kHz then there is no reason not to resample, other than possible compatibility issues.
Are you sure that it is resampling to 24 kbits and not 32?
Does the switch --resample 44100 be really optimized with V7 or V8 ?
Yes it is for compatibility issue with the flash.
At -V7 or -V8 quality will be compromised anyway, and keeping 44.1 kbps will degrade it further. I wouldn't worry too much about how well it is tuned here.
Have you considered using ABR instead?
Have you considered using ABR instead?
QUOTE(pdq @ Dec 13 2007, 06:49)
At -V7 or -V8 quality will be compromised anyway, and keeping 44.1 kbps will degrade it further. I wouldn't worry too much about how well it is tuned here.
Have you considered using ABR instead?
ABR? I'll try it. Do I have to use --vbr-new?
Thx
QUOTE(marcan @ Dec 13 2007, 07:52)
QUOTE(pdq @ Dec 13 2007, 06:49)
At -V7 or -V8 quality will be compromised anyway, and keeping 44.1 kbps will degrade it further. I wouldn't worry too much about how well it is tuned here.
Have you considered using ABR instead?
ABR? I'll try it. Do I have to use --vbr-new?
Thx
Ok, I tried it. Same issue. Resample to 32khz...
When the bitrate is low, Lame will always downsample.
In every case, if you need to keep 44.1kHz for Flash authoring, you should add "--resample 44100".
In every case, if you need to keep 44.1kHz for Flash authoring, you should add "--resample 44100".
I strongly suggest that you use MONO with such low bitrate. You will get almost twice the quality and if your sound file doesn't have much difference between channels, you won't lose all that much!
Offcourse, also your problems with resampling will disappear (this goes for as low as --preset 60; however, you should not use less than --preset 80, as ABR is not tuned as well there.):
EDIT: Fixed typos and added some info.
Offcourse, also your problems with resampling will disappear (this goes for as low as --preset 60; however, you should not use less than --preset 80, as ABR is not tuned as well there.):
CODE
C:\temp\test>lame --preset 100 -m m test.wav
LAME 3.97 32bits (http://www.mp3dev.org/)
CPU features: MMX (ASM used), SSE (ASM used)
Autoconverting from stereo to mono. Setting encoding to mono mode.
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 20094 Hz - 20627 Hz
Encoding test.wav to test.wav.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz average 100 kbps single-ch MPEG-1 Layer III (7.1x) qval=3
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
259/259 (100%)| 0:01/ 0:01| 0:01/ 0:01| 5.8527x| 0:00
32 [ 25] ****************
40 [ 0]
48 [ 0]
56 [ 0]
64 [ 7] *****
80 [110] *********************************************************************
96 [107] ********************************************************************
112 [ 1] *
128 [ 0]
160 [ 3] **
192 [ 2] **
224 [ 4] ***
256 [ 0]
320 [ 0]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps mono % long switch short %
85.7 100.0 98.6 0.4 1.0
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -3.3dB
LAME 3.97 32bits (http://www.mp3dev.org/)
CPU features: MMX (ASM used), SSE (ASM used)
Autoconverting from stereo to mono. Setting encoding to mono mode.
Using polyphase lowpass filter, transition band: 20094 Hz - 20627 Hz
Encoding test.wav to test.wav.mp3
Encoding as 44.1 kHz average 100 kbps single-ch MPEG-1 Layer III (7.1x) qval=3
Frame | CPU time/estim | REAL time/estim | play/CPU | ETA
259/259 (100%)| 0:01/ 0:01| 0:01/ 0:01| 5.8527x| 0:00
32 [ 25] ****************
40 [ 0]
48 [ 0]
56 [ 0]
64 [ 7] *****
80 [110] *********************************************************************
96 [107] ********************************************************************
112 [ 1] *
128 [ 0]
160 [ 3] **
192 [ 2] **
224 [ 4] ***
256 [ 0]
320 [ 0]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kbps mono % long switch short %
85.7 100.0 98.6 0.4 1.0
Writing LAME Tag...done
ReplayGain: -3.3dB
EDIT: Fixed typos and added some info.
QUOTE(marcan @ Dec 13 2007, 12:01)
QUOTE(pdq @ Dec 13 2007, 06:49)
At -V7 or -V8 quality will be compromised anyway, and keeping 44.1 kbps will degrade it further. I wouldn't worry too much about how well it is tuned here.
Have you considered using ABR instead?
ABR? I'll try it. Do I have to use --vbr-new?
Thx
QUOTE(marcan @ Dec 13 2007, 07:52)
QUOTE(pdq @ Dec 13 2007, 06:49)
At -V7 or -V8 quality will be compromised anyway, and keeping 44.1 kbps will degrade it further. I wouldn't worry too much about how well it is tuned here.
Have you considered using ABR instead?
ABR? I'll try it. Do I have to use --vbr-new?
Thx
Ok, I tried it. Same issue. Resample to 32khz...
Actually I meant have you considered using ABR instead of VBR in this bitrate range to see if it has the quality that you want
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.