As I understood it CBR would encode "easy" frames at 192 if the reservoir is at max
(not used), but ABR would encode these frames at 172, so in that case CBR would use
more bits for a frame than ABR. To avoid this you could use --abr 211.
Actually, i think this should be --abr 214, because 211 -10% = 189.9 !
(I have a file that gives 190 average with --abr 212 -b 160)
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: Ivo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2000 12:08 PM
Subject: Re: Sv: [MP3 ENCODER] ABR vs VBR
> > So both ABR 192 and CBR 192 have the same worst case scenario: many
> > frames encoded at around 172kbs. ABR wins in the best case scenario
> > since it will always have extra bits avialable even if the reservoir
> > is empty.
>
> > So I would stick with ABR 192kbs if you are happy with CBR 192kbs.
> > But to guarantee every single frame of an ABR encoding is at
> > least as good as CBR, you would need to use "--abr 211"
> > (192 + 10%)
>
> Wait a second, I don't get this. You just said that both CBR and ABR will do
> most frames at 172kbs (if the bit reservoir is heavily used), so didn't you
> mean to say "to guarantee every single frame of an ABR encoding is at least
> 192kbs you would need to use --abr 211"?
>
> Ivo
>
> --
> MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
