[ShootingStars]

From listening, I heard the V0 sounds more fun... is that true?

 

[Hero Kid]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this in the wrong sub forum?

 

[sashava]

so,which one sound better in my DAP:V0 or 320CBR? or no dif?I know people,
who claim to hear the dif;I dont.
this is forum about DAPs

 

[Hero Kid]

It all comes down to the individual.
LAME encoded -v0 is a VBR of 220...260kbps. LAME encoded -b 320 is a CBR of 320kpbs.
If you think it sounds better and is worth the extra space go for it! However if you can't hear the difference you are probably better off with -v0 or something as low as -v5 (120-150kbps). Any lower and in my opinion quality loss becomes audible to a large percentage.
I think this graph is also appropriate to post.

EDIT: For archiving I recommend using a losless audio format such as FLAC but on the go I support -v0 encoded mp3's.

 

[krmathis]

Sure, one have a constant bitrate (CBR) while the other have a variable bitrate (VBR).
Which in turn mean that the audio data is different as well, and then in turn a file size difference.

 

[james444]

As I understand the OP, she/he wonders why the V0 would sound more fun than the obviously higher quality 320 CBR. I'm only speculating, but it might be the result of psychoacoustic algorithms in the encoding process and only a personal preference to your ears.

 

[sashava]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hero Kid /img/forum/go_quote.gif It all comes down to the individual. LAME encoded -v0 is a VBR of 220...260kbps. LAME encoded -b 320 is a CBR of 320kpbs. If you think it sounds better and is worth the extra space go for it! However if you can't hear the difference you are probably better off with -v0 or something as low as -v5 (120-150kbps). Any lower and in my opinion quality loss becomes audible to a large percentage. I think this graph is also appropriate to post. EDIT: For archiving I recommend using a losless audio format such as FLAC but on the go I support -v0 encoded mp3's.

Graph,you are showing is based on statistic experiment and its right higher corner is rather inaccurate projection,not accurate measerment.The pool of people,who can say the dif of sound quality on the level described as "9" is very small and mostly unavailable in group large enough to be called "statistic".I think - the error in the right higher corner is around 10%(thats why we see number "9" but not "90") - you can not determine 1% increament in 10% error coridor; it is assumption.But of course - people are different and once in a while we will have Mozart and then 500 long years
waiting for another one..OP asked about dif between V0 and 320CB;
do you see any dif on your graph???It is much below error margin.

 

[rawrster]

Well there is the obvious difference where the bitrate of the v0 changes while the 320kbps is constant. Also with foobar and LAME I see 256kbps vbr as v0 so the bitrate should hover somewhere near that number. There is the lower quality compared to the 320kbps but whether you can hear a difference is up to your ears. I've never done an A/B comparison but I'm not sure if I would be able to tell the difference very well.

It could also by psychological why one is more fun than the other..honestly I got no clue.

 

[Hentai11]

My experience is that 320 CBR on old analog recording creates lots of crispy treble artifacts. My guess, it's the algorithm looking for data where there isn't any. Maybe v0 256 is more fun because it's more accurate.

I tend to rip at 320 ABR, and it outputs from ~270 kbps for old analog recordings to ~300 for new digital studio recordings.