Re: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-07 Thread Naoki Shibata
Roel The graphs you provided show a lower noise, this because --nspsytune Roel probably. It simply sounds poor, really poor. It sounds nothing like Roel the original on my headphones. Roel Roel I use the one with the "RH extensions" from Dmitry. (thanks for all Roel the compiles and hard

Re[6]: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-06 Thread Roel VdB
Hello Gargos, Friday, October 06, 2000, 2:13:24 AM, you wrote: GC Hello, GC Roel, maybe you should give these settings a try on that track: GC -V1 -mj -b128 -q2 -d -k --nspsytune --athlower -35 -X3 GC The bitrate stays pretty low (~224kbps) and it sounds very good... GC almost identical to

Re: Re[6]: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-06 Thread Gabriel Bouvigne
also: isn't that "-35" not extremely harsh on the athlower? I think that using a negative value with athlower is a bad idea. Regards, -- Gabriel Bouvigne - France [EMAIL PROTECTED] mobile phone: [EMAIL PROTECTED] icq: 12138873 MP3' Tech: www.mp3-tech.org -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list (

Re: Re[6]: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-06 Thread Gargos Chode
-- On Fri, 6 Oct 2000 16:40:23 Roel VdB wrote: It sounds much better on fatboy than the other options. GC I'd like to hear your thoughts on these settings. I think it's possibly only usable on this fatboy example. On velvet it sounds really poor and the bitrate is much too high: Im

Re[8]: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-06 Thread Roel VdB
Hello Gargos, Saturday, October 07, 2000, 1:40:57 AM, you wrote: GC Im not sure which part exactly you mean sounds very poor. The graphs you provided show a lower noise, this because --nspsytune probably. It simply sounds poor, really poor. It sounds nothing like the original on my

Re: Re[8]: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-06 Thread Gargos Chode
Hello, I use the one with the "RH extensions" from Dmitry. (thanks for all the compiles and hard work Dmitry btw!) Do you have a link to this version? I would like to try it out. Thanks. Dibrom 10% cash back on all your calls through 2000 at Lycos Communications at http://comm.lycos.com --

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-05 Thread Mark Powell
On Thu, 5 Oct 2000, Robert Hegemann wrote: From your recent postings I'm detecting that you think -q1 can only rarely give a sonic improvement. In fact it is more likely to degrade the sound over -q2? If so, the Roel recommendation of -q1, seems a little dangerous? You think the extra

Re[2]: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-05 Thread Roel VdB
Hello Robert, Thursday, October 05, 2000, 12:08:21 AM, you wrote: RH I don't know any track where the use of -q1 improves sound quality RH compared to a same sized -q2. That's why I'm asking you all. The reason I use it on -V1 is: I don't get poorer quality (still waiting for my

Re: Re[2]: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-05 Thread Gargos Chode
-- On Thu, 5 Oct 2000 11:05:14 Roel VdB wrote: Hello Robert, Thursday, October 05, 2000, 12:08:21 AM, you wrote: RH I don't know any track where the use of -q1 improves sound quality RH compared to a same sized -q2. That's why I'm asking you all. The reason I use it on

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-05 Thread Stephan Ebertshäuser
Robert Hegemann schrieb: Mark Powell schrieb am Mon, 02 Okt 2000: On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Robert Hegemann wrote: does someone know any sample where a VBR encoded MP3 with -q1 gives a better sounding MP3 compared to a same sized VBR with -q2 ? From your recent postings I'm detecting

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

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

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-04 Thread Robert Hegemann
Mark Powell schrieb am Mon, 02 Okt 2000: On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Robert Hegemann wrote: does someone know any sample where a VBR encoded MP3 with -q1 gives a better sounding MP3 compared to a same sized VBR with -q2 ? From your recent postings I'm detecting that you think -q1 can only

Re: [MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-10-02 Thread Mark Powell
On Fri, 29 Sep 2000, Robert Hegemann wrote: does someone know any sample where a VBR encoded MP3 with -q1 gives a better sounding MP3 compared to a same sized VBR with -q2 ? From your recent postings I'm detecting that you think -q1 can only rarely give a sonic improvement. In fact it is

[MP3 ENCODER] -q1

2000-09-29 Thread Robert Hegemann
Hi all, does someone know any sample where a VBR encoded MP3 with -q1 gives a better sounding MP3 compared to a same sized VBR with -q2 ? Ciao Robert PS: for VBR -q2 equals -h and is the default if you leave out -qx, -h or -f -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )