most of my mp3 files are encoded at variable bitrate. I always thought that this is the best way,because the encoder choose what bitrate to use every moment.But once I tried to encode a song with 256Kb bitrate,and it actually sounded better! It was Lame encoder.Confuse,I tried this alo by Xing encoder,and it also sounded better.I can notice the difference in some high frequencies only.Seems like it doesn't affect low frequencies.
Can someone explain it?
And one more thing,seems like song encode by Lame encoder sounds better than Xing encoder.
With some encoders, especially Xing you can select what quality you want when you select VBR, which might explain the quality difference.
With the second best quality that Xing offers I can't tell the difference between MP3s and CDs, but that may be down to my hearing.
I always thought the encoders used an external codec when encoding the tracks, but I might be totaly wrong. In which case there should be no difference depending on what encoder you use.
And you say people actually pay money for M$ Windows?
www.mp3mini.co.uk (Does what it says on the URL) www.openclassic.co.uk (The new car, with zero rust!) www.rob-web.co.uk (My other site)
Total re-design underway: on the whole progress is very slow as the car is taking up too much time :)
Lame and Xing both have their own encoders, (they are "external," but they are both different, with the lame sounding better) and VBR works off an average bitrate that you set, ie average of 128kbit, average of 156, etc. It will only sound slightly better, and take up slightly less space than a normally encoded mp3 of an equivalent compression (ie 128, 156).
-Nick
_____________________________
Since when is insanity a bad thing?
Monthly MP3Car Chicago Meets
www.mp3vw.com Last updated: 07/07/2008
aka Kumaneko
"Don't make me moderate your ***!"
Maxima of Doom - project thread - photo gallery
mp3car system is currently FUBAR and finances do not allow for a correction of that situation
Real computer hackers use a rotary cutting tool on their motherboard.
Dima, see http://www.r3mix.net/
Xing is not a very good encoder (worst?)... VBR is the best way to go usually--best quality / size ratio with 2 downsides 1) usually takes longer to encode files & 2) what ShinkunoNamida said.
Most would say either LAME or some Fraunhofer encoder works best.
VBR messes up when I try to burn audio CDs,
I get odd noises that don't happen to songs encoded with CBR
anyone else?
If you come out talking sh1t don't try to turn around and wipe you azz.
Nope. No problem here. Your burner / software sucks
I always rip VBR 0 (highest quality) using the LAME encoderwith the CDEX frontend. It usually averages out to about 220 kbps, and bounces between 160 and 320 as needed.
70 mins ends up at about 100 MB.
I was wondering.... should one turn off VBR And just go to 320 all the time if you dont TOTALLY care about space or at least set hte min to like 160? Or just let it do whatever it wants?
1999 Camaro z28
-- Computer installed :) Phase 1
-- z28 302hp dynoed :( WAHH!!!!
Originally Posted by jnusaira
Unless you are encoding at 320kbps, CBR is wasteful. Not all passages in a song need a high bitrate to sound good. This is why VBR was invented in the first place.
If you are going to encode mp3s it should be done with LAME, NOT Xing! Xing is one of the worst mp3 encoders in existence.
And if you use LAME unless you have special reasons its best to just use one of its 3 presets. --alt-preset standard, insane and extreme. These presets have been tuned over the past 2 years to produce the best encodes LAME can offer.
Standard : according to many listening tests done at Hydrogenaudio.org the standard preset produced files that where transparent to the original with a good percentage of the test subjects. Produces files that average around 200kbps
insane: Produces files that are on average around 240kbps.
extreme: Produces files that are 320kbps CBR, but with a few of LAME's quality options enabled.
All of LAME's presets encode files using Joint Stereo to best preserve the stereo image.
VBR will provide a "richer" sound, whereas CBR will be more "harsh".
This is because VBR (and ABR - Average Bit Rate) can use more bits where it needs it, and less in quiet/simple bits
I have all of my music in 192k Ogg Vorbis files, and they sound awesome to me. Granted I don't have £3k worth of audio equipment, but they sound better than MP3s on my system
Garry
Co-Developer of A.I.M.E.E
www.aimee.cc
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks