INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Looking for opinion on encoders...  (Read 2186 times)

DM_AS_BX_RX

  • Regular Member
  • Recent member
  • *
  • Posts: 26
  • Hello.  Is this to whom I'm speaking?
Looking for opinion on encoders...
« on: February 14, 2003, 11:54:20 am »

I'm sure this is a common question but I can't seem to find a straight answer.  

Anyone have an opninion on the best encoder that gives a good quality to compression ratio?

Thanks
Logged

zevele10

  • Guest
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2003, 01:17:23 pm »

LAME - you have it in MJ- mp3 192 VRB
Logged

xen-uno

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • Checking your hard disk for errors...
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #2 on: February 14, 2003, 01:31:57 pm »

...which corresponds to MP3 Encoder VBR with quality set from Normal to Normal/High when using MJ to encode. Of course though...if you want the standard bearer in quality from a lossy format...go with ogg.

10-27

MachineHead

  • Guest
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #3 on: February 14, 2003, 02:16:26 pm »

MPC if you are looking only for files that are playable on your pc. Otherwise mp3.

Sorry Xenno, everytime I try MPC vs OGG, the clear pick for me is MPC. OGG has always sounded 'tinny'(?) or bright I guess. Just my thoughts tho....
Logged

xen-uno

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • Checking your hard disk for errors...
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #4 on: February 14, 2003, 02:44:06 pm »

Mach...

I KNEW I'd hear from you on this (soon too will be 'sauce and 'selfs - also big MPC converts). You guys need to quit listening to that castinettes file. I work with steel too, ya know.

PS: I built a bird house today...check it out...



All 1/4" A36 plate...built to last and passes all known building codes.

10-27

KingSparta

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 20049
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #5 on: February 14, 2003, 02:46:23 pm »

I hope the bird don't fly into the side of it.

It might Hurt.

You May Neeed To Paint It Yellow With Black Stripes
Logged
Retired Military, Airborne, Air Assault, And Flight Wings.
Model Trains, Internet, Ham Radio
https://MyAAGrapevines.com
https://centercitybbs.com
Fayetteville, NC, USA

MachineHead

  • Guest
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #6 on: February 14, 2003, 03:08:10 pm »

Wow Xenno, that's nice! I made some out of wood, but left them at the old house when we moved. One was made from staved pieces of wood. It was round and a real challenge to get the pieces glued together. Have to make a few more for around here.

As for the test file, never listened to it. I test all encoders with the stuff I listen to, that way I know if it's something I want to use. But even MPC in all its glory doesn't match mp3 for me. I just can't take mpc on the road like mp3. HUGE SIGH!! Someday...

EDIT: You forgot TURBO! Major fan of MPC.
Logged

rocketsauce

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1059
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #7 on: February 14, 2003, 07:21:01 pm »

Here I am. :)

Even one of the guys over at HA (Garf) who does a lot of Vorbis tuning doesn't recommend high bitrate encoding when using Vorbis, esp. if you're using the 1.0 release.  IIRC, in a recent thread he stated that he thought LAME extreme/insane was better than Vorbis at -q 8.

Of course, if you can't tell the difference between -q 6 to -q 8 Vorbis from the original wav, as many people probably can't, then it's all good.

Rob
Logged

ChicoSelfs

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1079
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #8 on: February 15, 2003, 03:03:02 am »

For high Bitrates Using Vorbis Ogg is better to use GT3 ( Garf Tunning 3 ( Beta ) or use GT2 ) Vorbis Ogg V1.0 is not very good at high Bitrates is better for 128 kbps or so ( it beats Mp3 at those bitrates ) for high frequencies that you can't hear only your dog use MPC ( --xtreme --xlevel will do ) I personally use MPC  ;D ;D

GT2 ( Drop your waves on it )
http://sjeng.sourceforge.net/ftp/vorbis/oggdropgt2.exe

GT2 ( Beta 1 )
http://sjeng.org/ftp/vorbis/OggEncGT3b1.exe
Logged
Made in Portugal

phelt

  • Guest
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #9 on: February 15, 2003, 09:48:04 am »

IMO:
MPC is the best lossy format for quality at higher bitrates.
MP3 with LAME presets is a good compromise if you use a portable and don't want to do multiple conversions.
Ogg is great for bitrates <=128kbps - I wish it would be built into Shockwave...
Speex is very cool for spoken-word material (books on tape, lectures, etc). Should also be built into Shockwave...

YMMV  :)
Logged

xen-uno

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2489
  • Checking your hard disk for errors...
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #10 on: February 15, 2003, 07:23:17 pm »

Only one opinion here matters...that would be mine!...::)...:-X...and where's my backup? (C23, where are you?)

I would agree that MPC is probably the most efficient at getting the highest quality at a given (averaged) bitrate...starting around 160 kbs. So in ogg's (somewhat) untuned state (that is...starting at -q 5), it will take higher q levels and correspondingly larger files to match a particular MPC setting. But the difference between ogg, MPC, and a LAME 3.90/3.92 mp3 (using alt pre standard or extreme) on REAL music is VERY marginal even on expensive equipment. Golden ears or not...they're that close.

10-27

MachineHead

  • Guest
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #11 on: February 16, 2003, 01:57:15 am »

Quote
Only one opinion here matters...that would be mine!...
 ;D  ;D

Quote
But the difference between ogg, MPC, and a LAME 3.90/3.92 mp3 (using alt pre standard or extreme) on REAL music is VERY marginal even on expensive equipment

Yeah, I'd have to agree with that. I guess it's what sounds best to you that matters.
Logged

Reckless

  • Regular Member
  • Recent member
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • nothing more to say...
Re: Looking for opinion on encoders...
« Reply #12 on: February 16, 2003, 05:47:06 am »

The best answer to this question has a lot to do with the answer to these questions....:

Are you encoding for immediate playback, or for archiving music onto your hard drive?
***If  you are archiving to your HD, and have the available space, you might use a lossless encoder like Monkey's Audio or Shorten. These formats produce files roughly 50% of the original file size without *any* loss. They can be easily repurposed, or converted, on demand into other file types for use... like for playback in a portable mp3, or writing back to audio CD for an exact duplication of your original CD disc.

What device will you use for playback of your encoded files?
***If you use a portable mp3 player, you may get by with higher compression without noticable loss of fidelity. In this case, the particular encoder choice probably is not as important as its ability to generate files of the type you need... like WMA or MP3.

How involved do you want to be in the encoding process?
***The further you get into encoders, the more questions you'll have to answer. The simple (Read: easier to use) encoders that are built into players like Music Match, Media Juke Box, WinAmp, etc., may give you all you need in terms of quality and compression for your particular use. Or NOT!.... hehehehe.... If you're an audiophile looking for precise control over the many parameters and aspects of encoding, you'll want to check out some of the encoding schemes mentioned in the thread... Lame/Ogg/MPC, etc.

Can You Really Hear?
***How good IS you audio-ear? After 4 decades of smashing my ears with insanely loud rock and roll, my once pristine and finely-tuned audio factory is, well, trashed. Since I cannot hear sounds much above 14khz anymore, the music I encode for my personal use can be at a higer compression/lower bitrate. This I learned through experimentation with different encoding shemes and quality settings - oh yeah, and the doctor who frowned at me when testing my hearing. I would suggest you download a few free encoders and experiment to see just how good *your* hearing is.

So... the reason you don't find a *straight* answer may be because you need to answer a few questions for yourself first.

Another aspect of this is something like the (now old and tired) debate over vinyl versus digital. Much depends on personal choice, and by definition, that means that the right answer for *you* may be different from that of your best friend.

Experiment a little, think about what you are trying to acomplish with your encoding, and have some fun with it.

;D


That all said... I'd be happy to list my preference, as others on this thread have listed theirs... just ask. I think, however, that you will find your own solution just like the rest of us.








Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up