WHICH bitrate is better?
Feb 3, 2003 at 3:03 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 33
SENOR4Q

SENOR4Q

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
329
Likes
10
hi, I'm not sure if this is the correrct forum but I was wondering how does highest quality variable bit rate on lame encoder compare to 192kbs-320kbs mp3 and others?
 
Feb 3, 2003 at 5:14 AM Post #3 of 33
MPC? What I mean is, lets say I'm using easy cd-da or audiocatalyst and I want VBR highest quality, how does that compare ABR 150,175...250 kbs etc. and 192,256...320kbs constant bit rate etc.?
 
Feb 3, 2003 at 5:35 AM Post #5 of 33
THANKS JahJahBinks, or as I more often say 10q!
 
Feb 3, 2003 at 6:22 AM Post #6 of 33
LAME is the best MP3 encoder so I wouldn't bother with other ones.
 
Feb 3, 2003 at 9:03 AM Post #7 of 33
yeah if you're using cdda or audiocatalyst you aren't using LAME
 
HiBy Stay updated on HiBy at their facebook, website or email (icons below). Stay updated on HiBy at their sponsor profile on Head-Fi.
 
https://www.facebook.com/hibycom https://store.hiby.com/ service@hiby.com
Feb 3, 2003 at 12:41 PM Post #8 of 33
SO WHCICH one would you guys reco since I can't get eac to work anymore (don't know if its the firmware or the scisi but at this point I don't care) plus it would always encode my mp3 terribly (checksum problems and the song would say it was 2 min long when it was really 4 and 1/2 min long and....)
 
Feb 3, 2003 at 3:50 PM Post #10 of 33
A "simple" question:

If LAME and Fraunhofer encoding is the best, how/where do I get a program that uses these encoding methods? I'm running Windows XP Home, with a 1.7 G P4, 256 RAM, and Santa Cruz sound card. I have been using MusicMatch to rip MP3s from CD using VBR. What's a better method?
 
Feb 3, 2003 at 11:34 PM Post #11 of 33
Use EAC to *RIP* wav's, disable it's functions (and it's use of LAME...) for encoding into .mp3 and you should be fine... and simply use lame with the razorlame front end... two programs but it's worth it!
 
Feb 4, 2003 at 3:11 AM Post #14 of 33
True if EAC+lame isn't working then 2 seperates may be better. But based on Senor4Qs post, my guess is the problem lies within EAC or incorrectly setting up lame to work with EAC.

I could be wrong of course but his problems seem directly related to EAC other than time display errors (which is most likely decoder related) and checksum errors (not sure how this relates).

Zin
 
Feb 4, 2003 at 10:26 AM Post #15 of 33
Ok, I downloaded the EMC, installed it, followed directions to the tooth. Downloaded and put the lame.exe file in that EMC installed folder, just like the directions state. Everything looks A-Ok.

Now, for the simple question...By defult it's set to 128 kBit/s with the Lame being used as the external codec (just like the directions say)... and it's set in High Quality mode... now, I never used Lame before, I too usually use MusicMatch, used audiocatalist in the past..back in the napster days.

Now, should I just leave it at 128, is that like the best for lame, or is it a thumbs up... to go with 320 kBit/s... the way I see it, the bigger the number the better. lol... never used lame, who knows, might be some weird thing that is best for a lower bitrate, I don't know.

I'm guessing 320 is better, it's always usually better, but just in case. Just wanting a confirmation here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top