DLeeWebb
Headphoneus Supremus
What is LAME encoding and how do I do it...?
E5 vs E3c: Part 2
- Thread starter Shurenuff
- Start date
scottder
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2002
- Posts
- 3,485
- Likes
- 18
If you're using Windows check this out:
Chris Myden Guide to High Quality MP3s
or for Mac:
iTunes-LAME
Chris Myden Guide to High Quality MP3s
or for Mac:
iTunes-LAME
DLeeWebb
Headphoneus Supremus
ScottDer, thank you for the links. I am currently using AAC 320 kpbs. Would using this LAME encoder improve the quality of the audio...?
bangraman
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2002
- Posts
- 10,308
- Likes
- 83
No.
Shurenuff
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2004
- Posts
- 350
- Likes
- 10
Quote:
LAME is for compromising between quality and the size of a file. For instance, instead of having a 192kbps MP3 file, which maintains that bit rate consistantly, an APS LAME encoded MP3 file will give you roughly the same size file of that 192kbps file but with much better quality. The reason for this is because the bit rates usually vary between 128-320kbps. In situations where a higher bit rate is needed to reproduce quality sound, LAME encodes accordingly. The same can be said for situations where a high bit rate isn't necessary, LAME saves file space by encoding at a lower bit rate. In the end, all the variable bit rates of a Alt-Preset-Standard MP3 file average out to around 200kbps.
To get back on topic, I can say that I'm really enjoying my E5's. Last night, they really caught me by suprise. I was listening to The Roots- Do You Want More (a great jazz infused hip-hop group for those that are unaware) and was absolutely floored with the prodigious bass that the E5's produced. The beginning of the track, titled Do You Want More?, has extremely low bass. Listening through my iPod with the EQ off, the E5's nearly rattled my brain out of my head! I mean, this was unbelievable. It's amazing how much lower they can extend over the E3c's when necessary. The E5 produces a very natural and accurate bass response (IMO) in most music. However, when the recording calls for ridiculously low levels of bass, the E5 can deliver!
| Originally posted by DLeeWebb ScottDer, thank you for the links. I am currently using AAC 320 kpbs. Would using this LAME encoder improve the quality of the audio...? |
LAME is for compromising between quality and the size of a file. For instance, instead of having a 192kbps MP3 file, which maintains that bit rate consistantly, an APS LAME encoded MP3 file will give you roughly the same size file of that 192kbps file but with much better quality. The reason for this is because the bit rates usually vary between 128-320kbps. In situations where a higher bit rate is needed to reproduce quality sound, LAME encodes accordingly. The same can be said for situations where a high bit rate isn't necessary, LAME saves file space by encoding at a lower bit rate. In the end, all the variable bit rates of a Alt-Preset-Standard MP3 file average out to around 200kbps.
To get back on topic, I can say that I'm really enjoying my E5's. Last night, they really caught me by suprise. I was listening to The Roots- Do You Want More (a great jazz infused hip-hop group for those that are unaware) and was absolutely floored with the prodigious bass that the E5's produced. The beginning of the track, titled Do You Want More?, has extremely low bass. Listening through my iPod with the EQ off, the E5's nearly rattled my brain out of my head! I mean, this was unbelievable. It's amazing how much lower they can extend over the E3c's when necessary. The E5 produces a very natural and accurate bass response (IMO) in most music. However, when the recording calls for ridiculously low levels of bass, the E5 can deliver!
DLeeWebb
Headphoneus Supremus
Thank you for the information about LAME encoding. I have followed your comments on the Shure E5c's as well. Thanks for the vivid description of their performance. I am ordering mine later this week. I can't wait!
scottder
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2002
- Posts
- 3,485
- Likes
- 18
Quote:
As bangraman said in his wordy way, no. Most peole agree, that at that level, AAC and MP3 are pretty much the same.
LAME would come in if you wanted smaller file sizes (and this better battery life). but if you're happy with AAC at 320, stick with it.
Scott
| Originally posted by DLeeWebb ScottDer, thank you for the links. I am currently using AAC 320 kpbs. Would using this LAME encoder improve the quality of the audio...? |
As bangraman said in his wordy way, no. Most peole agree, that at that level, AAC and MP3 are pretty much the same.
LAME would come in if you wanted smaller file sizes (and this better battery life). but if you're happy with AAC at 320, stick with it.
Scott
Users who are viewing this thread
