Oh no, yet another "Which are the Best encoding settings thread"

[Keyper7]

Hi, as you may have already guessed this thread is to ask advice concerning the best encoding settings. Of course not the best in general (if there is such a thing...)
Please allow me to elaborate:

I am the proud(?) owner of an iRiver iMP-900, a CD-MP3 Player with WMA support (NO OGG support in spite of the company’s earlier claims... :()
and I am currently in the process of converting my *large* Audio-CD collection into MP3s to use with it.

The devices specs (http://www.iriver.com/html/product/prpa_product.asp?pidx=20) are as follow:
File Type MPEG 1/2/2.5 Layer 3, WMA, ASF
Bit Rate MP3: 8Kbps ~ 320Kbps

The player does support VBR although the manual says that time calculation may be off and scanning/skipping may not be (as) smooth... Basically I don't care much...

Now, I have been encoding using CBR MP3 in 192 kbps, this is the threshold that my hearing and the player's limitations perceive as "Transparency".
Although I have no complains in terms of quality, there is something to be said in terms of file size... remember, it is a CD-MP3 player so I am maxed at 701 MB
(and no, I won't use the various techniques that exist to write more in an 80 min disk risking bricking my player's lens...).

I won't care about encoding times or CPU usage
(I have an Athlon XP 3000+ FSB 400 with 512 DDR 400 in Dual-DDR mode, not the fastest or newest thing on the block but it will suffice)
nor will I be daunted by a quirky interface (although a more practical would be welcomed) of a certain software if it means better spending of that extra bit that will result in slightly better quality without sacrificing file size.
I already have Nero 7, MusicMatch 10, Winamp 5.13, Besweet 1.4 (an old version), HeadAc3 0.23a (yeah, too old) but will download an install almost anything (as long as it’s freeware or *free*…).

I DO care about quality but obviously size is also an issue (otherwise I'd keep using 192 CBR instead of busting your chops... :p).

What is my best choice for a file of quality just as good (or nearly just as good) with a 192 CBR MP3 and with the smallest file size?
(based on the audio codecs my player can actually decode!!!)
CBR, VBR (old, new, mtrh), ABR, ANYTHING goes!


Thanks for taking the time to reading this and I really appreciate any input on the matter.

P.S. (1) Could someone also suggest a good Tagging program, I’m truly tired of using the explorer’s properties. I also add lyrics and covers to my files!!!

P.S. (2) Since I will also use the CDs for backup purposes I’d rather NOT use WMA but if that is indeed my best option then perhaps I’d do the sacrifice… in any case also post the best option for MP3 encoding…

Cheers!!!

[Guest]

Do not ask for the "best" anything, per forum rule 12. Thank you.

[Keyper7]

Ok, let me rephrase that, could someone give me advice on encoding with the above mentioned audio quality while keeping the file size to a minimum?

(someone was awfully quick to send me a private warning... no matter)

Thanks for the heads up

Cheers!

[Dayvon]

I'll humor you.

I've found that for most popular music applications (i.e. rock, pop, r&b) transparency is about CBR 160kbps. Occasionally you can hear the bitrate, but not if you are in the car, in a subway, etc. etc. If you are surrounded by silence and have great headphones or a great home audio sound system you can hear it if you listen for it, but its not bad enough to ruin the enjoyment of the tracks.

For classical, movie soundtracks and the like that have alot of strings in them, I find that CBR 192kbps is the minimum for the same transparency.

Now these are generalizations because FYI, every source is different and therefore one setting will not work best for everything!! Secondly, I hear differently than you do so you might not like these settings at all.

I use Razorlame for Mp3 encoding. Of course you can use BeHappy, or Belight, or ExactAudioCopy directly. Just grab a copy of Lame 3.96.1 and have at it!!

In your case, I would follow those ideas either using CBR or ABR. If you are that worried about space, beyond that, then you need to start compromising quality, 'cause that's the only way that you'll get more space.

[Keyper7]

Thanks!!!

Could you possibly suggest me a known-to-be-good setting for lame
(either LAME 3.96.1 or LAME 3.98a3/3.97b2)

Well, I listen from Swedish Death Metal to classical so I guess 192 would be best... still, I agree that it is dependant on the source...

Thank you for your time

Cheers!

[kotrtim]

try this "LAME --vbr-new -V 5" ~130 kbps

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=28124

[pcaca]

The CBR method is the worst method for encoding. The methods ordered by quality are: VBR, ABR and CBR. If you want files with the size close to the CBR 192 you can use Lame 3.97b2 with folowing switches:
"-V 2 --vbr-new" - recomended setings by HydrogenAudio
or:
"-V 3 --vbr-new" - for smaller size.
With these settings you will have nearly same file size as CBR 192 but higher quality. These settings have variable bitrate, so the file size depends of the music complexity.
You can find usefull informations about Lame and encoding settings at:
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME

[Teegedeck]

try this "LAME --vbr-new -V 5" ~130 kbps

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=28124 A good setting.
See also this test (http://www.maresweb.de/listening-tests/mf-128-1/) (results (http://www.maresweb.de/listening-tests/mf-128-1/results.htm), discussion (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=40607)).

LAME 3.97 beta 2 at "-V5 --vbr-new" produces files around 130 kbps that sound almost transparent (undistinguishable from the original) to most listeners. I don't think you'll perceive a difference to your 192 kbps CBR encodings.

If you really can hear a difference, try lower '-V' settings, as pcaca wrote. -V2 should definitely be transparent around 200 kbps. But LAME 3.97b2's presets are so good that -V5 is probably enough.

Get LameDropXPd v2 with an inbuilt LAME 3.97 beta 2 at http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html.

[jolo]

Comression settings for LAME and OGG, or equilizer settings on music players are totally sugestive. There is no worst or best.
However their are setting that will better size/performance settings lile VBR settings.

What is best for the listener and what they want to do is the best !!

Heck, I know people that prefer listining to old vinyl records and like to hear the imperfections in it. I really like as clean a sound as possible and cannot stand over-amplified bass. But, that is me.

What must me understood is that one might be limited in the settings chosen due to limitations of audio hardware or software

When I merge audio and video, I ALWAYS use CBR settings. Why? because de-muxing with a MP3 CBR setting allows for greater compatibility for more stand alone DVD players playing MPEG2, 3 or 4. You know that they will work.

Many of the older portable audio players or older MP3 car stereos might only play up to 128 CBR.

I also like the point of where something is going to be listened too as well as the quality of unit and speakers as far as what is approriate.

For me personally, I rarely use MP3 as my compressed format of choice. I perfer using OOG. For one thing it is open source, it has free licensing and it is not in the Apple/Microsoft oligopoly of the formats that start with "W" and all the DRM crap that so many just accept. Both of the organizations cannot be trusted and have youor worst interests at heart and could care less

Besides, there are far better places to download legal music than iTUNES and far better and way more flexible portable audio players than the marketing machines have pumped ouot with the Ipud. However, the Ipud does have the fashionable marketing appeal, the "cool factor".

The CBR method is the worst method for encoding. The methods ordered by quality are: VBR, ABR and CBR. If you want files with the size close to the CBR 192 you can use Lame 3.97b2 with folowing switches:
"-V 2 --vbr-new" - recomended setings by HydrogenAudio
or:
"-V 3 --vbr-new" - for smaller size.
With these settings you will have nearly same file size as CBR 192 but higher quality. These settings have variable bitrate, so the file size depends of the music complexity.
You can find usefull informations about Lame and encoding settings at:
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME

[jolo]

Mr Teegedeck,

For MP3, I have always liked the --alt standard feature in LAME. I always thought that the VBR effects were just about perfect for listening on a portable audio player.

The question I have is with that terrific LameDropXPd v2, which uses 3.97b2. I use it, when I need to create a MP3 file. The version of LameDropXPd v2 was created in December 2005 and is v2.0.
When I look at the encoding window, I don't see where I can input manual setting or where I can tell it "vbr-new" From what I understand, the vbr-new settings have replaced what was the alt presets and are more effective to use. How can I use them in LameDropXPd v2 ?

Thanks,

Jon


A good setting.
See also
:helpful:(results (http://www.maresweb.de/listening-tests/mf-128-1/), discussion (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=40607)).

LAME 3.97 beta 2 at "-V5 --vbr-new" produces files around 130 kbps that sound almost transparent (undistinguishable from the original) to most listeners. I don't think you'll perceive a difference to your 192 kbps CBR encodings.

If you really can hear a difference, try lower '-V' settings, as pcaca wrote. -V2 should definitely be transparent around 200 kbps. But LAME 3.97b2's presets are so good that -V5 is probably enough.

Get LameDropXPd v2 with an inbuilt LAME 3.97 beta 2 at [url]http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html.

[jolo]

http://forum.doom9.org/images/smilies/thanks-t.gif
:thanks:Keyper7,

Hold the phone. I am amazed at the limitations of your iRiver player. It is almost as limited as a Ipud !!:(

There really is no support for Ogg, APE or some of the other open source, license free formats?

Quality is important to me as well, but not to an extreme level, on my audio player. I will have a byte by byte exact copy of the souorce on my hardrive to allow for the best playback anyone can get.
Oh yes, Congratulations for BOTH not being subject to the marketeers on NOT having a iPUD and having AMD. That is why you PC might not be the most expensive, but it will be the fast one on your block.[B]
For Backing up:

There are compressed lossless formats like Monkeys' APE that will create files at about 50% of the size of a PCM or WMA.
I hope you can get a DVD writer in the future. The costs for blank DVD media are not much more than CDs and the DVD records are a heck of a lot less money than before.
I find the most economical way of backing up if by getting a one the low cost IDE drives around from Seatgate, Maxtor, etc and getting a enclosure box with it that turns IDE into USB. Then (if you have XP), you can just plug the unit into any USB 2.0 socket backup, restore or even use independently. It doesn't take too long to keep accumulating media and the disk drive of course goes a lot faster and gives a lot more flexibility and storage.
For exact copies, I create image files of CDs. This is the same as having the total digital equivelent of the original being copied. Through tools like Daemon tools, Nero INcd, you can allow the image file can be seen as a virtual CD drive. It will also have all of the output functionality of a CD drive.\
I do haver some items where one backup is not enough, like my family photos, some financial records, etc. For those I have on my external drive as well as a DVD drive. I also recommend NOT to use "trashy" type of blank media for archiving. If you want to make sure they last, use products like Taiyo Yuden, etc. Beware of most of the low csot stuff like HP, Maganox which use CRC.


Jon

Hi, as you may have already guessed this thread is to ask advice concerning the best encoding settings. Of course not the best in general (if there is such a thing...)
Please allow me to elaborate:

I am the proud(?) owner of an iRiver iMP-900, a CD-MP3 Player with WMA support (NO OGG support in spite of the company’s earlier claims... :()
and I am currently in the process of converting my *large* Audio-CD collection into MP3s to use with it.

The devices specs (http://www.iriver.com/html/product/prpa_product.asp?pidx=20) are as follow:
File Type MPEG 1/2/2.5 Layer 3, WMA, ASF
Bit Rate MP3: 8Kbps ~ 320Kbps

The player does support VBR although the manual says that time calculation may be off and scanning/skipping may not be (as) smooth... Basically I don't care much...

Now, I have been encoding using CBR MP3 in 192 kbps, this is the threshold that my hearing and the player's limitations perceive as "Transparency".
Although I have no complains in terms of quality, there is something to be said in terms of file size... remember, it is a CD-MP3 player so I am maxed at 701 MB
(and no, I won't use the various techniques that exist to write more in an 80 min disk risking bricking my player's lens...).

I won't care about encoding times or CPU usage
(I have an Athlon XP 3000+ FSB 400 with 512 DDR 400 in Dual-DDR mode, not the fastest or newest thing on the block but it will suffice)
nor will I be daunted by a quirky interface (although a more practical would be welcomed) of a certain software if it means better spending of that extra bit that will result in slightly better quality without sacrificing file size.
I already have Nero 7, MusicMatch 10, Winamp 5.13, Besweet 1.4 (an old version), HeadAc3 0.23a (yeah, too old) but will download an install almost anything (as long as it’s freeware or *free*…).

I DO care about quality but obviously size is also an issue (otherwise I'd keep using 192 CBR instead of busting your chops... :p).

What is my best choice for a file of quality just as good (or nearly just as good) with a 192 CBR MP3 and with the smallest file size?
(based on the audio codecs my player can actually decode!!!)
CBR, VBR (old, new, mtrh), ABR, ANYTHING goes!


Thanks for taking the time to reading this and I really appreciate any input on the matter.

P.S. (1) Could someone also suggest a good Tagging program, I’m truly tired of using the explorer’s properties. I also add lyrics and covers to my files!!!

P.S. (2) Since I will also use the CDs for backup purposes I’d rather NOT use WMA but if that is indeed my best option then perhaps I’d do the sacrifice… in any case also post the best option for MP3 encoding…

Cheers!!!