For the best sound-per-size (bang-per-buck) in MP3 files you
HAVE to try the "--r3mix" setting in LAME encoder. It's
wonderful. The audiophile setting, but with a file size
not much bigger than 128bitrate.
Read more at:
http://www.r3mix.net/
(click on 'QUALITY' link at left)
Lame has it b
In the last episode (Jul 23), Gary Dunn said:
> On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 05:16, Dan Nelson wrote:
> ...
> > remember you're going to lose quite a bit of quality, as lame will
> > try and encode the artifacts on the first mp3, plus add its own as
> > it tries to lower the bitrate. Don't re-encode unl
On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 05:16, Dan Nelson wrote:
...
> remember you're going to lose quite a bit of quality, as lame will try
> and encode the artifacts on the first mp3, plus add its own as it tries
> to lower the bitrate. Don't re-encode unless you need to play them on
> something that simply can
Dan Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Ogg Vorbis audio format is designed to allow this; they call it
> "bitrate peeling".
Are you sure? I only skimmed the discussion on this, but I was
under the impression that the current format did not support it
although a future one might.
--
Chris
>I generally don't use VBR, to keep compatibility with the consumer devices
>that I might want to play the files in. Sure, some might support VBR but I
ll
>stay on the safe side.
True, but since my Archos Jukebox Recorder 20 supports VBR flawlessly it's
not realy an issue for me, i suppose when i
At 04:59 PM 7/23/2002 +0100, Mike Woods wrote:
>VBR anyone ?
>
>When i encode mp3's i generaly use VBR, it keeps the file size down but gets
>good qualty, and mpg123 can handle playing VBR's with a 320-32 kbps range on
>a p133 so im good :D
I generally don't use VBR, to keep compatibility wit
Drew Tomlinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm looking for a command line utility that will take mp3s with
> bit rates greater than 128K as input and output 128K mp3s. Does
> such a thing exist?
I think the MP3 format doesn't allow bit rate peeling, i.e. you
can't do this any other way than by
>I prefer 192k, personally. Disk is inexpensive. ;-) I had fun this past
>weekend and
>ripped/encoded ~150 CDs from collection. With any luck I'll be able to
f>inish the
>rest this weekend. I love buying CDs, but I hate dealing with
>them. Everything goes right to hard drive now.
VBR anyone ?
Wh
At 08:25 AM 7/23/2002 -0700, Drew Tomlinson wrote:
>Thank you for your answer. So it's not as simple as just discarding
>some data to lower the bit rate? I was just trying to save some disk
>space as 128K mp3s sound good to me. Well I guess it's off to eBay to
>shop for an additional drive. :)
In the last episode (Jul 23), Drew Tomlinson said:
> From: "Dan Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Lame should be able to take mp3s as input and generate mp3s. But
> > remember you're going to lose quite a bit of quality, as lame will
> > try and encode the artifacts on the first mp3, plus add its o
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Nelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Drew Tomlinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "FreeBSD Questions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: MP3 Conversion Port?
> In the last episo
In the last episode (Jul 23), Drew Tomlinson said:
> I've searched and browsed the ports collection for a tool that will
> allow me to convert mp3 files bit rates. Basically I have a
> collection of mp3s that were encoded at various bit rates. I'm
> looking for a command line utility that will t
I've searched and browsed the ports collection for a tool that will
allow me to convert mp3 files bit rates. Basically I have a
collection of mp3s that were encoded at various bit rates. I'm
looking for a command line utility that will take mp3s with bit rates
greater than 128K as input and outp
13 matches
Mail list logo
