Gargos Chode
Thu, 05 Oct 2000 04:39:50 -0700
-- On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 21:30:23 Ross Levis wrote: >Gargos Chode wrote: > >> -V1 -mj -b128 -q2 -d -p -k -F --nspsytune --athlower -35 -X3. > >Some thoughts: > >-p & -F will have no effect on sound quality. I have had mixed results with >nspsytune. -X2 & X3 both produce massively larger average bitrates than all the >others. I've never played with -d. Can someone tell me if allowing channels to have >different blocktypes has any bad side effects? ie. ISO or decoder compatibility? > >Ross. > > >-- >MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ ) > Hello, I know that -p and -F don't have any effect on sound quality, infact I stopped using -F cause alot music I have has hidden parts in songs and the drop to 32kbps was nice there for space saving reasons. As for -X2 and -X3 the fact that they are the slowest and usually produce files with much higher bitrates is probably the reason they also seem to sound so good. That is basically why I am using --nspsytune and --athlower, to get that file size to come back down to a reasonable level. It might make more sense to just use a different set of switches which will produce files around those bitrates in the first place instead of making large files and trying to squeeze them back down, but from what I have heard, it actually sounds better the latter way. In some cases I have actually seen these settings produce smaller files than -V1 -mj -h -b128, and they still sound better. On average, it seems to produce files an average of 20kbps at least for most of the music I listen to. H! owever, with certain sound clips, particularly ones with very fast transients and noise like sound overlayed upon strings or melodic sounds, the bitrate seems to be much much higher than normal. One clip I have actually reaches up to 290kbps. Im thinking something about that particular kind of sound, or the production used on those albums, is tripping up the encoder and forcing it to use too many bits. Either that or those pieces are just extremely hard to encode without producing alot of distortion. For ISO compatibility and decoder compatibility, I haven't seemed to notice any difference at all. For that matter in most cases I dont notice a difference in filesize or sound quality either, so I'm not really sure that its even doing anything, but it at least sounds good in theory. Dibrom Get your FREE Email and Voicemail at Lycos Communications at http://comm.lycos.com -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )