Re: Re[4]: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-05 Thread Gargos Chode

 Hello,

Roel, maybe you should give these settings a try on that track:

-V1 -mj -b128 -q2 -d -k --nspsytune --athlower -35 -X3

The bitrate stays pretty low (~224kbps) and it sounds very good... almost identical to 
the original.  These are the only settings I could find that produce a smaller file 
than using 256kbps that still sounds good (actually it sorta sounds a bit better.. 
seems the noise is less harsh than that generated by 256kbps).  I'd like to hear your 
thoughts on these settings.

--

On Fri, 6 Oct 2000 00:28:06   
 Roel VdB wrote:
>Hello Gargos,
>
>Thursday, October 05, 2000, 12:08:31 PM, you wrote:
>GC> Have you tried using -q1 on fatboy.wav?  It sounds significantly
>GC> worse than -h or -q2.  If you dont have this file let me know and
>GC> I will send it to you.
>
>I agree that -q1 sounds worse on this one using "-V1 -mj -b128 -q1 -h"
>VS "-V1 -mj -b128 -q2 -h".  Sad thing is that bitrate doesn't seem to
>be the problem here.  Some more fundamental problem since the noise
>levels are very low (in db's), yet the noise is very apparent.
>
>"-q2 -h" is still worthless since it's poor sounding @260kbit/s :(.
>
>but you have a point, both mess up, q2 sounds better, yet far from
>good...
>
>I'm thinking the flaw is not with -q1 but somewhere else.  the noise
>levels are lower than normal -V1 graphs, but relying more on the
>psychoaccoustics on this track would be the wrong choice.  Maybe
>someone feels the urge to tweak the psycho-acc so this one will sound
>good @320 ? :))
>
>> LAME version 3.87 (beta 1, Sep 27 2000)(http://www.mp3dev.org)
>> Encoding as 44.1 kHz VBR(q=1) j-stereo MPEG-1 LayerIII ( 6.0x estimated) qval=1
>>  32 [%.5]*
>> 128 [ 5%]
>> 160 [21%]*
>> 192 [17%]*
>> 224 [33%]**
>> 256 [18%]***
>> 320 [ 6%]*
>> average: 210.2 kbps
>>
>> LAME version 3.87 (beta 1, Sep 27 2000)(http://www.mp3dev.org)
>> Encoding as 44.1 kHz VBR(q=1) j-stereo MPEG-1 LayerIII ( 6.0x estimated) qval=2
>>  32 [%.5]*
>> 128 [ 3%]
>> 160 [15%]
>> 192 [ 8%]*
>> 224 [ 7%]
>> 256 [17%]*
>> 320 [49%]**
>> average: 260.3 kbps
>
>
>-- 
>Best regards,
> Roelmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>--
>MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
>


Get your FREE Email and Voicemail at Lycos Communications at
http://comm.lycos.com
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )



Re[4]: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-05 Thread Roel VdB

Hello Gargos,

Thursday, October 05, 2000, 12:08:31 PM, you wrote:
GC> Have you tried using -q1 on fatboy.wav?  It sounds significantly
GC> worse than -h or -q2.  If you dont have this file let me know and
GC> I will send it to you.

I agree that -q1 sounds worse on this one using "-V1 -mj -b128 -q1 -h"
VS "-V1 -mj -b128 -q2 -h".  Sad thing is that bitrate doesn't seem to
be the problem here.  Some more fundamental problem since the noise
levels are very low (in db's), yet the noise is very apparent.

"-q2 -h" is still worthless since it's poor sounding @260kbit/s :(.

but you have a point, both mess up, q2 sounds better, yet far from
good...

I'm thinking the flaw is not with -q1 but somewhere else.  the noise
levels are lower than normal -V1 graphs, but relying more on the
psychoaccoustics on this track would be the wrong choice.  Maybe
someone feels the urge to tweak the psycho-acc so this one will sound
good @320 ? :))

> LAME version 3.87 (beta 1, Sep 27 2000)(http://www.mp3dev.org)
> Encoding as 44.1 kHz VBR(q=1) j-stereo MPEG-1 LayerIII ( 6.0x estimated) qval=1
>  32 [%.5]*
> 128 [ 5%]
> 160 [21%]*
> 192 [17%]*
> 224 [33%]**
> 256 [18%]***
> 320 [ 6%]*
> average: 210.2 kbps
>
> LAME version 3.87 (beta 1, Sep 27 2000)(http://www.mp3dev.org)
> Encoding as 44.1 kHz VBR(q=1) j-stereo MPEG-1 LayerIII ( 6.0x estimated) qval=2
>  32 [%.5]*
> 128 [ 3%]
> 160 [15%]
> 192 [ 8%]*
> 224 [ 7%]
> 256 [17%]*
> 320 [49%]**
> average: 260.3 kbps


-- 
Best regards,
 Roelmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )