RE: [MP3 ENCODER] 22/56/JS - Lame vs Fraunhofer
Shawn Riley schrieb am Don, 01 Jan 1970: > >I'm not quite sure actually, but I think that mp3enc3.1 lets you control more than >that ACM > I'll bet it does, & I was actually referring to the command line interface with >that one... AFAIK, MP3Enc only has -no-is & -dm. -no-is doesn't tell it what to >use, it only tells it what »not« to use. > > >this is because FhG always tolds that MPEG2.5 files can only go up to 64 kbits > What on earth posessed FhG to do that if the MPEG specs allow MPEG-2½ to use >bitrates up to 160kBit/sec? Perhaps Lame should display a warning about using such >bitrates with MPEG-2½ compression, just as there's a warning about using >--freeformat. MPEG2.5 is *not* an ISO standard, it is FhGs own *extension* to the ISO specifications. So using MPEG2.5 is per se not MPEG conform. > > Something else... > 1- Encoding to 11025Hz - VBR max 160kBit/sec - Stereo - produced skips in Winamp, >both with WAV file output, & WaveOut. > 2- I added a WAV header & adjusted it to cope with VBR, in the same manner that >normally allows it to work fine for VBR. Opening with Media player produced the same >skips as in Winamp. > 3- Loading-&-converting this L3WAV in a waveform editor & playing it back was >perfect! No skips. I wonder why. So much for there being a standard... This could be a padding problem by lame. > > Shawn Robert -- e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] homepage: http://linux.unixcity.de/catwalk/index.html -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
RE: [MP3 ENCODER] 22/56/JS - Lame vs Fraunhofer
>I'm not quite sure actually, but I think that mp3enc3.1 lets you control more than >that ACM I'll bet it does, & I was actually referring to the command line interface with that one... AFAIK, MP3Enc only has -no-is & -dm. -no-is doesn't tell it what to use, it only tells it what »not« to use. >this is because FhG always tolds that MPEG2.5 files can only go up to 64 kbits What on earth posessed FhG to do that if the MPEG specs allow MPEG-2½ to use bitrates up to 160kBit/sec? Perhaps Lame should display a warning about using such bitrates with MPEG-2½ compression, just as there's a warning about using --freeformat. Something else... 1- Encoding to 11025Hz - VBR max 160kBit/sec - Stereo - produced skips in Winamp, both with WAV file output, & WaveOut. 2- I added a WAV header & adjusted it to cope with VBR, in the same manner that normally allows it to work fine for VBR. Opening with Media player produced the same skips as in Winamp. 3- Loading-&-converting this L3WAV in a waveform editor & playing it back was perfect! No skips. I wonder why. So much for there being a standard... Shawn -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
RE: [MP3 ENCODER] 22/56/JS - Lame vs Fraunhofer
Shawn Riley schrieb: > >Also, Fraunhofer use intensity stereo at low bitrates. Maybe you could > >compare LAME with FhG -no-is. > No can do. The Fraunhofer ACM codec only says if the output is in Stereo or Mono. Winamp displays these "Stereo" files created by FhG ACM as being "Joint Stereo", but I'm not sure if it really is JS or if Winamp is incorrectly displaying IS as JS. > What is IS? Is it like JS at low frequencies with panned mono highs, or is it every frequency band in panned mono? IS means intensity stereo, some higher frequencies encoded in mono with some panning information it is one of the joint stereo tools you can enable turning on joint stereo the other one is mid/side stereo (the only one implemented in LAME) > I think it's quite disastrous that the standard Fraunhofer encoder doesn't let you specify exactly how you want stereo files to be treated. The encoder knows nothing about the system that the files will be played back on, & can't really be sure if that mode will be best. Thanks heaps to whoever added the -m option to Lame with all its parameters. More options = better control (usually). I'm not quite sure actually, but I think that mp3enc3.1 lets you control more than that ACM > > I just did some tests with v3.83. Mostly the low sample rate stuff. 24/56/JS from v3.83 is better than both 24/64/JS 22/64/JS from v3.62! Well done, everyone! :-) The resampling works a charm too! Just a couple of things though. > 1- Compressed a 4'30" song to MP3 using the command line lame.exe -v -V8 -B40 -mm -c -h -p --lowpass 5.3 --resample 12 --noshort in.wav out.mp3 > a- The average bitrate was reported as 19 kBit/sec by the frame analyser at the end of encoding (which was correct), but when I loaded it in Winamp, it thought the file was 38 kBit/sec. It also reported the song as being 2'15" (half of what it actually was). Winamp bug or Lame bug? Winamp didn't stop when it got to 2'15" though. And it DID actually play the whole song, so that's a good sign... it looks like Winamp doesn't expect a MPEG2.5 VBR file? > b- Using the same options, except with resampling to 11025 Hz, the file averaged 27 kBit/sec. That puzzles me too. Shouldn't it be slightly smaller in size than the 12 kHz sample? no, because of how the freq bins get filled and the masking works > 2- Winamp refused to play back an 11025 Hz - 96 kBit/sec - Stereo MP3. The --strictly-enforce-ISO option didn't work. A(nother) bug in Winamp, perhaps? this is because FhG always tolds that MPEG2.5 files can only go up to 64 kbits > 3- When using CDex to convert a 12 kHz - 64 kBit/sec - Stereo MP3 to a Layer-3 WAV, the Fraunhofer ACM wouldn't load it. The WAV header was correct. Then I checked the compression options for the Fraunhofer ACM. 12 kHz was ABSENT! Does FhG have something against MP3 with 12kHz? > > Shawn Robert -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
RE: [MP3 ENCODER] 22/56/JS - Lame vs Fraunhofer
>Also, Fraunhofer use intensity stereo at low bitrates. Maybe you could compare LAME >with FhG -no-is. No can do. The Fraunhofer ACM codec only says if the output is in Stereo or Mono. Winamp displays these "Stereo" files created by FhG ACM as being "Joint Stereo", but I'm not sure if it really is JS or if Winamp is incorrectly displaying IS as JS. What is IS? Is it like JS at low frequencies with panned mono highs, or is it every frequency band in panned mono? I think it's quite disastrous that the standard Fraunhofer encoder doesn't let you specify exactly how you want stereo files to be treated. The encoder knows nothing about the system that the files will be played back on, & can't really be sure if that mode will be best. Thanks heaps to whoever added the -m option to Lame with all its parameters. More options = better control (usually). I just did some tests with v3.83. Mostly the low sample rate stuff. 24/56/JS from v3.83 is better than both 24/64/JS 22/64/JS from v3.62! Well done, everyone! :-) The resampling works a charm too! Just a couple of things though. 1- Compressed a 4'30" song to MP3 using the command line lame.exe -v -V8 -B40 -mm -c -h -p --lowpass 5.3 --resample 12 --noshort in.wav out.mp3 a- The average bitrate was reported as 19 kBit/sec by the frame analyser at the end of encoding (which was correct), but when I loaded it in Winamp, it thought the file was 38 kBit/sec. It also reported the song as being 2'15" (half of what it actually was). Winamp bug or Lame bug? Winamp didn't stop when it got to 2'15" though. And it DID actually play the whole song, so that's a good sign... b- Using the same options, except with resampling to 11025 Hz, the file averaged 27 kBit/sec. That puzzles me too. Shouldn't it be slightly smaller in size than the 12 kHz sample? 2- Winamp refused to play back an 11025 Hz - 96 kBit/sec - Stereo MP3. The --strictly-enforce-ISO option didn't work. A(nother) bug in Winamp, perhaps? 3- When using CDex to convert a 12 kHz - 64 kBit/sec - Stereo MP3 to a Layer-3 WAV, the Fraunhofer ACM wouldn't load it. The WAV header was correct. Then I checked the compression options for the Fraunhofer ACM. 12 kHz was ABSENT! Does FhG have something against MP3 with 12kHz? Shawn -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
Re: [MP3 ENCODER] 22/56/JS - Lame vs Fraunhofer
>Also, please use a recent version of LAME! The FDD controller on my computer has burned out or something... I don't have a connection at home either, so my computer's pretty much isolated until I can get it fixed. I'm going into a computer store today or tomorrow to get everything I've downloaded, burned onto a CD. I'll see how the latest goes. Shawn -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
Re: [MP3 ENCODER] 22/56/JS - Lame vs Fraunhofer
> > From: Shawn Riley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > > I forgot to add that Fraunhofer also sounded better at 48k > > than Lame did at 56k... Maybe this filtering is why. Also, please use a recent version of LAME! Mark has put in a ton of low bitrate work in the past month. Lame 3.6x can't compare to current. Monty -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
RE: [MP3 ENCODER] 22/56/JS - Lame vs Fraunhofer
> From: Shawn Riley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > I forgot to add that Fraunhofer also sounded better at 48k > than Lame did at 56k... Maybe this filtering is why. Also, Fraunhofer use intensity stereo at low bitrates. Maybe you could compare LAME with FhG -no-is. -- Mat. -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
