So there we are, the first audio players I've heard of that won't touch VBR 
<smile>.


On 27/12/2009, at 11:03 AM, Tim Noonan wrote:

> Also,
> 
> There are devices, even modern ones, which don't reliably, or indeed at all,
> cope with VBR.
> 
> The Olympus machines, even the DM-520  are a case in point - so use VBR with
> care if you want to guarantee everyone and everything can play your MP3
> files.
> 
> Regards
> Tim
> 
> Tim Noonan
> Director, Vocal Branding Australia
> Transforming products, brands and experiences so they Sound as great as they
> look and feel!
> 
> Phone:   +61 419 779 669
> Web:     www.vocalbranding.com.au/blog
> Email:   t...@vocalbranding.com.au
> Twitter: www.twitter.com/VocalEssence
> Skype:     TimNoonan
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org [mailto:pc-audio-boun...@pc-audio.org]
> On Behalf Of Dane Trethowan
> Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2009 9:05 AM
> To: PC Audio Discussion List
> Subject: Re: Pros and cons of varible bit rate
> 
> Okay, I just consulted an audio engineer abut what you wrote about minimum
> bit rates for VBR encoding and here's his response, it also talks about
> setting VBR quality and I'll have a few words to say about this after his
> quotation which follows:
> 
>> Well, basically it depends on what you're trying to do.  There are several
> factors that contribute to VBR quality (apart from encoding quality settings
> of course).  Most immediately noticeable is the over-all VBR quality
> setting, which `weights' the VBR result between the minimum and maximum you
> set. Imagine VBR as a set of scales swinging everywhere between min. and
> max. depending on what's going into the encode.  VBR quality simply
> determines how the scales are weighted, either more towards minimum or
> maximum depending on what you set.  The higher VBR Quality, the less the
> encoder will `throw away', and so the more it will weight the encode towards
> the higher end of the scale. If the quality is set high enough, you won't
> achieve *anything* by increasing the minimum; all you'll do is make your
> file larger for no benefit, since the encoder will waste a load of bandwidth
> encoding things (such as silence or low frequencies) that don't need it.
> Conversely, if your VBR Quality setting is too low, the encoder will throw
> away so much that everything will get pushed towards the lower end, and so
> the Minimum setting will make a great deal more difference.  But even then,
> all it will do is make your file bigger, and probably it won't help the
> encode quality, since you shouldn't have set the quality so low in the first
> place.
>> 
>> So, basically, for normal operation, it's a complete waste of time pushing
> up the minimum.  The exception is if you have a hardware player that can't
> cope with very low bitrates (our Omni DVD players were hopeless with
> anything below 64KbPS), unless, _perhaps_ if the source is *very* noisy (an
> old dodgy cassette) where you don't want noise causing a load of artifacts,
> but you still want the file as small as possible.  But under those
> circumstances, you'd be far better off processing the original source and
> removing as much noise as possible without damaging the audio _before_
> encoding.
>> 
>> The only other reason you might want to push up the minimum is if the
> encoder has a dodgy VBR algorithm that tends to push too much towards the
> bottom of the scale, even when the VBR Quality setting is high.  LAME's
> `--vbr-old' algorithm is excellent, but `--vbr-New' still has problems.
> Unfortunately, other encoders (such as Fraunhofer) are a *hell* of a lot
> worse, so if you're forced to use them, it might be worth it.
>> 
>> Anyway, hope this explains things; basically, unless you have a very
> specific need, don't play with Min/Max bitrates - you're likely only to get
> worse encodes and bigger files.
> 
> Thank you kind Sir for your time and trouble <smile> so now to my additional
> notation about VBR quality and this can add to confusion.  When setting VBR
> quality it works in the reverse as it looks, in other words the lower the
> number the higher the VBR quality, 3 or 4 may be a good setting for music,
> for mono audio or talking books, audio documentaries etc try say between 4
> and 6.
> 
> On 27/12/2009, at 6:38 AM, Kevin Lloyd wrote:
> 
>> The only point I'd add to Dane's notes is that I have read advice around
> not setting your variable floor too low.  I'd suggest for music that you set
> the floor to 128kbps rather than the suggestion below of 16kbps.
>> 
>> Regards.
>> 
>> Kevin
>> E-mail: kevin.llo...@sky.com
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dane Trethowan"
> <grtd...@internode.on.net>
>> To: "PC Audio Discussion List" <pc-audio@pc-audio.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 7:33 PM
>> Subject: Re: Pros and cons of varible bit rate
>> 
>> 
>>> I suppose it comes down once again to personal preference, I've been
> using varriable bit rates for youears.
>>> 
>>> As I understand it, encoding with a varriable bit rate takes a lot longer
> as the encoder looks at every sample of the song thus deciding what bit rate
> it should be encoded at, silence for example is encoded at a lower bit rate
> than a full sample of orchestra sound, minimum and maximum bit rates for
> variable encoding are set up with your encoding engine such as LAME so for
> the best and accurate results you're better off doing this sort of thing
> manually with a command line so use an app which supports this, Exact Audio
> Copy is an excellent choice here.
>>> 
>>> Their are several methods of VBR encoding, "Old" and "new", "new" is
> quicker for those jobs you want out the door fast but quality isn't quite as
> good if you're picky, with today's flying processor speeds you may as well
> use "Old".
>>> 
>>> Also note that some older players may not handle VBR playback though I
> haven't struck one that doesn't yet.
>>> 
>>> Suggested minimum and maximum bit rates for VBR? Well just use the
> minimum and maximum rates available or if you're configuring from a command
> line or a piece of software that takes full advantage of the LAME-ENC.dll
> library then 16 bits for the minimum and 320KBPS for the maximum, there are
> 2 quality settings you have to be aware of here, one is VBR quality and you
> may wish to change this for certain audio material you're encoding, say
> music and talking books.  The other quality setting leave at maximum, will
> take longer but far better results.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 27/12/2009, at 6:21 AM, Jamie Pauls wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The subject is a question, not a statement. I have been uploading Main
> Menu archives as a 128KBPS MP3 file. I see that many people recommend
> 192KBPS, but there a parts of the show that really don't need that high a
> bit rate. In fact, I have also read that encoding at too high a bit rate can
> cause unwanted artifacts just as much as encoding at too low a bit rate.
> Variable bit rate seems a good choice for me to use, but I would like some
> thoughts from audio experts. Thanks.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Jamie Pauls
>>>> MSN: jamiepa...@hotmail.com
>>>> Skype: jamie.pauls
>>>> 
>>>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
>>>> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ******************************
>>> 
>>> Dane Trethowan
>>>> From Melton Victoria Australia
>>> mailto:"grtd...@internode.on.net
>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/grtdane
>>> blog: http://www.grtdane.wordpress.com
>>> Phone United Kingdom
>>> 02032874641
>>> Phone Australia
>>> 0390058589
>>> Phone United States
>>> 8159261869
>>> Fax:
>>> +61 3 9743 7954x
>>> MSN grtd...@dane-trethowan.net
>>> skype:grtdane12
>>> 
>>> ******************************
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
>>> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org 
>> 
>> 
>> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
>> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org
> 
> 
> ******************************
> 
> Dane Trethowan
>> From Melton Victoria Australia
> mailto:"grtd...@internode.on.net
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/grtdane
> blog: http://www.grtdane.wordpress.com
> Phone United Kingdom
> 02032874641
> Phone Australia
> 0390058589
> Phone United States
> 8159261869
> Fax:
> +61 3 9743 7954x
> MSN grtd...@dane-trethowan.net
> skype:grtdane12
> 
> ******************************
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
> pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org


******************************

Dane Trethowan
>From Melton Victoria Australia
mailto:"grtd...@internode.on.net
Twitter: http://twitter.com/grtdane
blog: http://www.grtdane.wordpress.com
Phone United Kingdom
02032874641
Phone Australia
0390058589
Phone United States
8159261869
Fax:
+61 3 9743 7954x
MSN grtd...@dane-trethowan.net
skype:grtdane12

******************************





To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to:
pc-audio-unsubscr...@pc-audio.org

Reply via email to