Gamingforce Interactive Forums
85199 35210

Go Back   Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis > Garrmondo Music and Trading > Behind the Music

Notices

Welcome to the Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis.
GFF is a community of gaming and music enthusiasts. We have a team of dedicated moderators, constant member-organized activities, and plenty of custom features, including our unique journal system. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ or our GFWiki. You will have to register before you can post. Membership is completely free (and gets rid of the pesky advertisement unit underneath this message).


Guide to Ripping & Encoding High Quality MP3s
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Moguta
Tentacle Extraordinaire


Member 15679

Level 12.01

Nov 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Feb 17, 2008, 11:34 PM #51 of 108
Hello Moguta,

is the LAME V2 better than LAME CBR 192? Many/Most files which i encoded with LAME V2 have an average bitrate of ~160; only few reach an average of 190+. So those 160-VBR's, are they indeed better than a potential CD-rip to 192-CBR?

192-CBR (=average is 192) is higher than ~160 (=average is 160). Isnt higher better? That's why i am asking..

Thanks, best, Lousy
Higher bitrates means that more information is being stored. However, whether a particular higher bitrate is "better" is not an easy question to answer.

The short answer is that the ~32Kbps difference between your -V2 --vbr-new and 192Kbps CBR encodes is very likely a combination of CBR inefficiencies and inaudible information.

The entire point of MP3 is to shrink file sizes. VBR attempts to be as efficient about that goal as possible, by determining what bitrates are necessary for each file to encode them with a certain -V quality. More complex audio requires fewer bits, and less complex audio really doesn't need high bitrates (Note: Though true, that explanation is an extreme simplification). CBR, in contrast, just throws however many bits at a file that you tell it, without regard to how many it actually needs to sound the same as the original. It could be too little, or -- as it seems in your example above -- too much.

By the way, I would stick with -V2. It is a time- and test-proven quality setting. The VBR quality #s above that (-V1 and -V0) will likely begin to store more inaudible, unnecessary information, eroding the VBR's efficiency. Some people do prefer the "overhead", however, feeling safer even if there is no audible difference.

How ya doing, buddy?


Good morning, post-apocalyptia!

Last edited by Moguta; Feb 17, 2008 at 11:39 PM.
Lousy
a lousy male pianophile


Member 22593

Level 28.91

May 2007


Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2008, 07:55 AM Local time: Feb 18, 2008, 02:55 PM #52 of 108
Wow, great explanations. I'm enlightened. Thanks for the splendid replies!
Ah, me too i have a foobar related question... Does a plugin (component) exist for converting to Windows Media Audio (*.wma) instead of to LAME V2 (*.mp3)?
Some of my sets and rips are in *.wma, so i would want to convert the inet ape/flac's to wma ... just for the sake of homogenity of file extensions *g*
i googled. and i think that foobar2000 doesnt support the conversion TO wma.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?
LiquidAcid
Chocorific


Member 6745

Level 38.97

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2008, 08:58 AM Local time: Feb 18, 2008, 02:58 PM #53 of 108
You don't want to convert to WMA, trust me...

I was speaking idiomatically.
Rew
Syklis Green


Member 19131

Level 8.78

Feb 2007


Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2008, 09:11 AM #54 of 108
I'm not sure if this is the right place for this question, but I've recently ripped some game music into .AUS format. How can I convert .AUS files into WAV or MP3 files? Thanks!

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?
Moguta
Tentacle Extraordinaire


Member 15679

Level 12.01

Nov 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Feb 18, 2008, 06:50 PM #55 of 108
Wow, great explanations. I'm enlightened. Thanks for the splendid replies!
Ah, me too i have a foobar related question... Does a plugin (component) exist for converting to Windows Media Audio (*.wma) instead of to LAME V2 (*.mp3)?
Some of my sets and rips are in *.wma, so i would want to convert the inet ape/flac's to wma ... just for the sake of homogenity of file extensions *g*
i googled. and i think that foobar2000 doesnt support the conversion TO wma.
Thanks. I could even go more in-depth, but I figured I'd spare you the long-winded explanation. ;p

And although I would recommend encoding to LAME MP3 rather than WMA, I did find a guide to do exactly what you ask:
How to set up Converter for WMA 9 - Hydrogenaudio Forums

I'm not sure if this is the right place for this question, but I've recently ripped some game music into .AUS format. How can I convert .AUS files into WAV or MP3 files? Thanks!
I'm sorry, but I don't know what .AUS files are and couldn't find it in a quick Google.

FELIPE NO


Good morning, post-apocalyptia!

Last edited by Moguta; Feb 18, 2008 at 06:54 PM.
Lousy
a lousy male pianophile


Member 22593

Level 28.91

May 2007


Reply With Quote
Old Feb 19, 2008, 08:47 AM Local time: Feb 19, 2008, 03:47 PM #56 of 108
I did find a guide to do exactly what you ask
that's exactly what i was searching for (even on that forum) but never detected in the WWW. you got the better nose and eyes Thanks for your kind help. I've saved that page to HDD, downloaded the specific encoder, and will follow the instructions (test at home). Excellent resource. both hydrogenaudio, and you nice guys

THANKS!!

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?
Rew
Syklis Green


Member 19131

Level 8.78

Feb 2007


Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2008, 11:26 PM #57 of 108
Gawd, I'm about to pull my f***ing hair out right now.

Does anyone know of a good alternative to Audacity? I'm ripping files from a couple games, and most of them convert from WAV to MP3 just fine in Audacity. But there are these weird few that absolutely won't compute in Audacity, for no reason at all. I tried changing disk writers in Winamp, but with the exact same result. So the problem is with Audacity. Anyone know of any good substitutes? (I'm using Audacity to convert these WAV files to MP3 as well as to give them a 5-second fade-out at the end.)

Jam it back in, in the dark.
Basil
Banned


Member 499

Level 48.58

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 12:07 AM Local time: Feb 28, 2008, 11:07 PM #58 of 108
I use Exact Audio Copy to convert WAVs ripped directly from CDs into mp3 but I use dBpowerAMP for anything else. The latter program requires a crack for you to use it as long as you want, though, so you might want to look for it on a torrent site.

There's nowhere I can't reach.
Lousy
a lousy male pianophile


Member 22593

Level 28.91

May 2007


Reply With Quote
Old Feb 29, 2008, 03:57 PM Local time: Feb 29, 2008, 10:57 PM #59 of 108
that's exactly what i was searching for (even on that forum) but never detected in the WWW. you got the better nose and eyes Thanks for your kind help. I've saved that page to HDD, downloaded the specific encoder, and will follow the instructions (test at home). Excellent resource. both hydrogenaudio, and you nice guys

THANKS!!
Just to let you know, i did that conversion (lossless ape -> 128kbps WMA) following the options given at that hydrogenaudio page, and i am very pleased with the resulting files. I really have the impression that WMA's at low bitrates are superior in (subjective) sound impression than MP3's (FhG) at the same CBR-bitrate.

LAME V2 is as good of course, since it is VBR, and some files are as small as the low-bitrate-but-great-sounding WMA-CBR's. It all depends on the lossless source audio material --- i guess.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.
Rew
Syklis Green


Member 19131

Level 8.78

Feb 2007


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2008, 01:02 PM #60 of 108
I use Exact Audio Copy to convert WAVs ripped directly from CDs into mp3 but I use dBpowerAMP for anything else. The latter program requires a crack for you to use it as long as you want, though, so you might want to look for it on a torrent site.
Which torrent site do you recommend? (I tried hunting around, but when I found a torrent site that required membership on a porno site, I pretty much figured I'm going to need some help on finding a more suitable alternative!)

EDIT: Ack!! Okay, I found a copy of dBpowerAMP that I could download--but it doesn't work right. When it asks for files to convert, and I go to the folder with my WAV files I want to convert...nothing comes up. It can't bring up WAV files! What gives? How do I make it bring up and convert WAV files?

Basically, I need a program that functions exactly like Audacity. =(

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Last edited by Rew; Mar 1, 2008 at 01:12 PM.
Basil
Banned


Member 499

Level 48.58

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2008, 02:33 PM Local time: Mar 1, 2008, 01:33 PM #61 of 108
EDIT: Ack!! Okay, I found a copy of dBpowerAMP that I could download--but it doesn't work right. When it asks for files to convert, and I go to the folder with my WAV files I want to convert...nothing comes up. It can't bring up WAV files! What gives? How do I make it bring up and convert WAV files?

Basically, I need a program that functions exactly like Audacity. =(
Not sure what the problem is there. You tried setting the 'Files of type' drop-down box to All Audio Files?

Chances are you might have a fake version of the program, though. I'll upload mine for you:

Download links - Sharebee.com, the one and only online file hosting distribution service.

How ya doing, buddy?
Moguta
Tentacle Extraordinaire


Member 15679

Level 12.01

Nov 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2008, 03:07 PM #62 of 108
Basil, Audacity is not solely a converter, but is mainly an audio waveform editor. Rew seems to need the ability to fade his recordings as well as encode them.

Rew, perhaps you can try the trial versions of Sound Forge or Cool Edit. Although, I can't remember, one of their trial limitations might be that you can't save your work...

Also, do you notice any difference about the files that Audacity won't open? Is it audio from entire games that won't open, or will only some tracks in the same game not work? Do they have unusual sample rates? And can you play the problematic WAVs fine in your audio player?

Most amazing jew boots


Good morning, post-apocalyptia!

Last edited by Moguta; Mar 1, 2008 at 03:12 PM.
Rew
Syklis Green


Member 19131

Level 8.78

Feb 2007


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2008, 03:29 PM #63 of 108
Thanks, everyone! Actually, I figured out a different sort of trick. The WAV files that would go nowhere in Audacity I opened in iTunes instead and converted them to MP3. Their sound quality remained intact, and this time, as MP3 files, I was able to play them in Audacity and do the five-second fadeouts that I wanted. So all that to say, problem solved!

Moguta: What was weird is that I couldn't find any commonality at all among the WAV files that Audacity wouldn't take. Tracks from literally the same folder of a game would convert splendidly, while a stubborn few just wouldn't at all, and no error messages were given either. Oh well. At least that's over with now. =0)

Most amazing jew boots
Moguta
Tentacle Extraordinaire


Member 15679

Level 12.01

Nov 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2008, 03:31 PM #64 of 108
Just to let you know, i did that conversion (lossless ape -> 128kbps WMA) following the options given at that hydrogenaudio page, and i am very pleased with the resulting files. I really have the impression that WMA's at low bitrates are superior in (subjective) sound impression than MP3's (FhG) at the same CBR-bitrate.

LAME V2 is as good of course, since it is VBR, and some files are as small as the low-bitrate-but-great-sounding WMA-CBR's. It all depends on the lossless source audio material --- i guess.

Modern audio encoder implementations do seem pretty competitive around 128Kbps, as demonstrated by the results of this public ~128Kbps double-blind listening test in December 2005:



Although, this test isn't entirely relevant to your statement, since it used WMA Pro in VBR mode rather than CBR WMA. It's just too bad there have been no public double-blind listening tests performed with LAME's -V2 --vbr-new or --alt-preset standard modes. (In the above test, LAME is evaluted by its lower-quality -V5 --vbr-new setting.) I have heard that its simply too fatiguing for most people to try to reliably & repeatably discern between that level of quality and the original.

Additional Post:
Thanks, everyone! Actually, I figured out a different sort of trick. The WAV files that would go nowhere in Audacity I opened in iTunes instead and converted them to MP3. Their sound quality remained intact, and this time, as MP3 files, I was able to play them in Audacity and do the five-second fadeouts that I wanted. So all that to say, problem solved!

Moguta: What was weird is that I couldn't find any commonality at all among the WAV files that Audacity wouldn't take. Tracks from literally the same folder of a game would convert splendidly, while a stubborn few just wouldn't at all, and no error messages were given either. Oh well. At least that's over with now. =0)
That is strange, about Audacity not opening files randomly. Perhaps you could report it to the devs and see what they make of it, for the future.

And in case you didn't realize, when you open the MP3 in Audacity and then re-save it after doing the fade-out, you are actually re-encoding the MP3. (WAV -> lossy MP3 -> lossier MP3 w/fade)

To preserve audio quality, you could try:
1. Download Foobar2000 and do a full install... or at least make sure that you install the Converter component.
1b. Download & extract the current FLAC and LAME encoders (links in the 1st post of this thread)
2. Add the desired WAVs to Foobar's playlist, then select them all and choose Convert > Convert to... from the right-click menu.
3. Select FLAC, level 5 from the drop-down box, hit OK, and wait for it to complete. The first time you convert, it will also ask for the location of the FLAC encoder you just downloaded.
4. Import the FLAC files into Audacity, then delete the FLACs once you have encoded to MP3. Alternately, since Audacity only encodes in outdated CBR mode, you could have Audacity export the faded audio to WAV and use Foobar2000 to convert them into efficient, high quality VBR MP3s. Just add the WAVs and proceed like you converted to FLAC, but instead selecting MP3 (LAME), 190 kbps, V2, fast in Foobar's converter.

EDIT: Oooops, I forgot that Foobar's converter doesn't include the encoders themselves! Updated it to work.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?


Good morning, post-apocalyptia!

Last edited by Moguta; Mar 1, 2008 at 05:15 PM.
Lousy
a lousy male pianophile


Member 22593

Level 28.91

May 2007


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2008, 07:58 AM Local time: Mar 5, 2008, 02:58 PM #65 of 108
Wow Moguta, that was interesting.. Thanks!

[...]

I'm still trying to encode (=rip from FLAC *images*) MP3's (LAME V2 v3.97) with foobar2000. I guess i must delete the downloaded FLAC-image if the accompanying CUE-image sheet is pretty much wrecked, am I right?

Well, I dont know much about correctly working CUE-sheets, but I do know that CUE-sheets (produced by ExactAudioCopy rips) sometimes need minor editing, e.g. the .WAV" WAVE needs to be edited to .APE" WAVE for APE-images, or CDImage.wav" WAVE needs to be edited to CDImage.flac" WAVE for FLAC-images.

But let's assume that the CUE-sheet is absolutely not working -- i dunno why -- (inside the CUE-file, the single tracks are labelled as APE's...for my huge FLAC-image); question/FLAC-images: Is there any good way to extract the single tracks WITHOUT ANY EXISTING/VALID/WORKING cue-sheet?

(If the image file were in *.NRG-image format, i would mount the image with Daemon-tools (virtual CD drive) and then rip the single tracks with foobar2000, Nero, etc.)

Thanks for hope or help!!

ADDIT: i'll be happy to post a sample ยง$%&! cue-sheet. i deleted most non-working downloaded flac/cue-pairs, but...

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Last edited by Lousy; Mar 5, 2008 at 04:40 PM.
LiquidAcid
Chocorific


Member 6745

Level 38.97

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 5, 2008, 01:08 PM Local time: Mar 5, 2008, 07:08 PM #66 of 108
I'm still trying to encode (=rip from FLAC *images*) MP3's (LAME V2 v3.97) with foobar2000. I guess i must delete the downloaded FLAC-image if the accompanying CUE-image sheet is pretty much wrecked, am I right?
Why don't you post the cuesheet here and the file layout?

Well, I dont know much about correctly working CUE-sheets, but I do know that CUE-sheets (produced by ExactAudioCopy rips) sometimes need minor editing, e.g. the .WAV" WAVE needs to be edited to .APE" WAVE for APE-images, or CDImage.wav" WAVE needs to be edited to CDImage.flac" WAVE for FLAC-images.
I hope you also know WHY you have to do this.

But let's assume that the CUE-sheet is absolutely not working -- i dunno why -- (inside the CUE-file, the single tracks are labelled as APE's...for my huge FLAC-image); question/FLAC-images: Is there any good way to extract the single tracks WITHOUT ANY EXISTING/VALID/WORKING cue-sheet?
Post cuesheet and file layout. Otherwise nobody can help you.

(If the image file were in *.NRG-image format, i would mount the image with Daemon-tools (virtual CD drive) and then rip the single tracks with foobar2000, Nero, etc.)

Thanks for hope or help!!
NRG is an image format already with the cuesheet embedded. If you want you can also modify it, but it's harder because it's not in clear text like the "normal" .CUE-sheet.
Burning a disc without a cuesheet is not possible, some firmware also verifies the sheet (older burners did this and so had problems when cloning copy-protected discs).

There's nowhere I can't reach.
Lousy
a lousy male pianophile


Member 22593

Level 28.91

May 2007


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 29, 2008, 04:20 PM Local time: Mar 29, 2008, 11:20 PM #67 of 108
Question What's our VERY FINAL *full* commandline for 'LAME CBR|VBR with foobar2000' ?

unexplained instructions for LAME VBR with EAC are given as:


explained instructions for LAME VBR with EAC are given as:


1. observation: the two 'LAME VBR with EAC'-commandlines differ in length: the 3rd hydrogenaudio-commandline is much longer. side question: Is it preferrable to the gff-commandline, for EAC-users?

2. EAC is not foobar2000, so the above screenshots could be "invalid" for me, since i am a foobar2000 user (EAC?? Too complicated for my little brains ) and am really missing a webpage which shows clear full commandlines to enter for 'LAME VBR|CBR with foobar2000'. The installed mp3 vbr preset looks like this, and here again, the commandline differs from the above two 'LAME VBR with EAC'-examples. :


Well, what i need is simple; view me as a PC-newbie who wants to have 2 (and not 1) mp3-options with his foobar2000:

[1] conversion/ripping to "LAME newV2" with all automatic tagging included (written tags sourced from e.g. CD-TEXT, cue-sheets, mp3-tags, wma-tags, or even freedb.org, etc.) and no normalization. (i guess that "--noreplaygain" means "no normalization". but i dont understand the "-S" parameter..)

[2] conversion/ripping to "LAME CBR 192", again with all automatic tagging etc. included, i.e. the same as [1] except for CBR 192.


Question: what should i enter in the "Parameters:"-line of foobar2000 as the full commandline for [1] and [2]? --- the foobar2000-commandline, obviously, must look different from the EAC-commandlines since all three screenshots show different lines for the same case, namely for "LAME newV2". Confusing!!

i googled the inet for a webpage which exemplifies the usage of LAME encoder with foobar2000 in explicit different full "Parameters:"-commandlines, i.e. for case[1], case[2], and further popular cases, but didnt find any..

Thanks for some help!!

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Last edited by Lousy; Mar 30, 2008 at 01:29 PM. Reason: one gif-image didnt display. renewed link to gif-image.
Moguta
Tentacle Extraordinaire


Member 15679

Level 12.01

Nov 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2008, 02:38 AM 1 #68 of 108
In your first image, everything after --vbr-new and before %s %d is tagging parameters. Note that %a, %t, %g, and such are all EAC-specific parameters that EAC replaces with each track's values before it actually passes that command line to LAME.

To respond to each of your needs:

[1] There's no need to go into the Custom encoder mode in Foobar for this. Just choose MP3 (LAME), 190Kbps, V2, fast when encoding or converting. If it's not already in there, just select MP3 (LAME) for the encoder, drag the quality to the ~190Kbps, V2 tick, and make sure Fast Mode (--vbr-new) is checked. Foobar itself takes care of copying all the necessary tags.

[2] For this, you do need to go to Custom for the encoder. Delete -V2 --vbr-new from the existing LAME command line and replace it with -b 192 instead.

I have to mention, it is strongly recommended not to encode in CBR, unless doing so for an old device that literally does not support VBR. Even using average bitrate mode (ABR) is an improvement over CBR, and gives you the bitrate predictability that quality-oriented VBR lacks. (Encoding at an average bitrate of 190Kbps, for example, would be done --abr 190)

EDIT: Since you were curious, and I didn't know, I looked up the -S parameter in LAME's help. It simply suppresses the text-based encoding progress report (which is what you see when ripping with EAC), because Foobar has its own graphical progress meter. And --noreplaygain simply means it doesn't calculate the track ReplayGain after encoding every file, which is fine. You'd have to use another program to calculate the album ReplayGain anyway.

How ya doing, buddy?


Good morning, post-apocalyptia!

Last edited by Moguta; Mar 30, 2008 at 02:56 AM.
LiquidAcid
Chocorific


Member 6745

Level 38.97

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 30, 2008, 06:34 AM Local time: Mar 30, 2008, 12:34 PM #69 of 108
EDIT: Since you were curious, and I didn't know, I looked up the -S parameter in LAME's help. It simply suppresses the text-based encoding progress report (which is what you see when ripping with EAC), because Foobar has its own graphical progress meter. And --noreplaygain simply means it doesn't calculate the track ReplayGain after encoding every file, which is fine. You'd have to use another program to calculate the album ReplayGain anyway.
However it should be possible to calculate album RG when the track RG values are present, simply by weighting track RG with track length and summing up. I wonder why no application can do this, or am I missing something here?

I was speaking idiomatically.
Moguta
Tentacle Extraordinaire


Member 15679

Level 12.01

Nov 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2008, 06:02 PM #70 of 108
Since ReplayGain relies on a geometric mean of small pieces of all the audio, I'm not sure that one can calculate album gain based on the track gain of all tracks in the album.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?


Good morning, post-apocalyptia!
LiquidAcid
Chocorific


Member 6745

Level 38.97

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2008, 08:40 PM Local time: Apr 1, 2008, 02:40 AM #71 of 108
Right, I didn't think about that.

FELIPE NO
Spikey
Sierra Music Quester


Member 13178

Level 13.35

Sep 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2008, 09:14 PM Local time: Apr 6, 2008, 12:44 PM #72 of 108
This is nuts- GFF should simply recommend people download the latest version of LAMEDrop, pick a quality setting, and go from there- dealing with all these custom switches seems (to me at least) more likely than not to result in people wrongly encoding, or encoding worse files than they could, simply because all the options will be meaningless to them.

Why not just use an easy drag and drop (not commandline) based encoder? And why not recommend that for newbs?

I run a game music website and understand compression reasonably well and would still NEVER recommend a command-line based encoder, no matter the person's technical undeerstanding.

- Spike

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?
LiquidAcid
Chocorific


Member 6745

Level 38.97

May 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2008, 05:05 AM Local time: Apr 6, 2008, 11:05 AM #73 of 108
I disagree. If you don't know what a graphical interface does on the commandline you should either read the documentation or leave it be and let someone else encode the music (someone else with more experience).

Saves us from a lot of RTFM questions.

@"all these custom switches": I have only seen two usage of switches that don't relate to encoding quality: -S and --noreplaygain
Both are easy to understand (S = silent = turn down verbosity of the encoder; noreplaygain = don't calculate replaygain).
If you don't know RG you google it and read the Wiki entry. Plus that saves us from these annoying "Is RG = normilization" bullshit questions.

In addition try this with a GUI encoder: Have a bunch of FLAC files you want to transcode to MP3 (VBR V4) to use them on your portable (reason to only use V4) with only a minimum amount of user interaction (including the possibility of batch conversion). I can hack you a script using flac, metaflac, lame and eyeD3 (all cmdline tools) that does that fully automatically, even preserving file tags.
Include the script call into your context menu and you have a one-click solution to the problem. Nice, fast and accurate. You can even integrate upload to your portable IF connected.

Everyone thinking that using LAME (or any other application) on cmdline is difficult: You're wrong, you just need some time to read the docs. There are only a few options in LAME you need to memorize for basic LAME usage. That's five to ten minutes reading the docs and then you know how the cat jumps.

Saves you from a lot of trouble ("I know I have to use this and that switch and then I get a MP3....") and if you want to use a more exotic functionality you look it up (that's what the docs a there for).

Audio encoding is not about "it just works" (that's partially the reason why so many CBR320 rips are floating around, the people just don't know better), it's about "doing it right" and for that you need to understand what it means to "do it right".

LAME is the swiss army knife of MP3 encoding, but you still have to know when and where to use what part (knife, saw, wine opener... you get the picture).

Jam it back in, in the dark.
Moguta
Tentacle Extraordinaire


Member 15679

Level 12.01

Nov 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2008, 01:29 PM #74 of 108
This is nuts- GFF should simply recommend people download the latest version of LAMEDrop, pick a quality setting, and go from there- dealing with all these custom switches seems (to me at least) more likely than not to result in people wrongly encoding, or encoding worse files than they could, simply because all the options will be meaningless to them.
Well, for one, using LAMEdrop means that tags must always be manually input. If you are transcoding, Foobar2000's converter will copy all of your tags automatically. If you are ripping a CD, EAC will automatically retrieve the CD info and appropriately tag the ripped MP3s. There's no need to make ripping a two-step process -- using one program to rip, another to encode, and manually entering tag information -- when it can all be done in a single stroke.

Also, talking about "newbs", LAMEdrop would likely be a strange program to them. It has no menu bar, it has no title bar or closing "x", it stays on top no matter what you do, every option is accessed by right-clicking on it, and it has no standard option to add files. The program gives no indication that one must right-click to adjust the options, and while it does say "Drop Files Here", it's only computer "newbs" who won't know how to drag & drop when every other program has a File > Open/Add Files menu selection.

LAMEdrop may not prevent newbs from messing with options they shouldn't, either. See "Encoding Engine Quality" at the bottom. While I can't be sure, because LAMEdrop doesn't let one see LAME's encoding process, that's probably adjusting the -q X parameter, which messes with the presets and should not be specified.

Additionally, I notice that since early LAME 3.98 betas, the "Fast" --vbr-new mode has become the default. However, in the LAMEdrop based on 3.98b6, the options still default to "Standard" rather than "Fast". I wonder if "Standard" passes --vbr-old or if it passed no parameter, just relying on it formerly being the default. If that's the case, then both modes are essentially "Fast". That's the drawback of easy-mode, no-command-line frontends; they break when commands change. And advanced users who actually know the commands can't tell exactly what the frontend is doing.

To be honest, I understand your concerns, Spike. I don't think there is any frontend or converter out there that is adequate for both "newbs" and experienced users. I just chose Foobar because I think it has the best and most advantages, with the fewest drawbacks.

Foobar2000 Pros:

1) Converts from compressed formats; does not require the user to convert to WAV first
2) Converts to multiple formats, all under the same program interface
3) Automatically copies all file tags
4) "Newb"-friendly sliding-scale converter options
5) Advanced users can see & modify the command line options
6) Files can be renamed, based on tags or other parameters, as they are converted

Foobar2000 Cons:

1) Is a media player, not just a converter
2) Encoders must be downloaded separately
3) "Newb"-friendly encoding options are somewhat limited*
4) Does not show detailed encoder progress during conversion

*Using LAME as an example, only VBR options are available.

LAMEdrop, on the other hand, shares ONLY the advantage of "newb"-friendly encoding options. Concerning Foobar's cons, though, LAMEdrop's GUI options are more extensive than Foobar's, it does not come with extra unneeded capabilities, and the encoder is right in the program. But, in my opinion, the additional power & capability of Foobar makes up for those cons, especially since LAMEdrop shares the lack of detailed encoding-progress information and has a non-standard interface.

My ideal converter would:

1) Just be a converter
2) Convert to and from multiple formats
3) Copy all tags
4) Have extensive GUI slider options for all standard modes
5) Have an advanced option to enable command line editing
6) Come with currently recommended versions of all encoders, allowing replacement
7) Optionally show each encoder's detailed DOS-shell progress when encoding
8) Allow files to be re-named & re-pathed on conversion

However, as far as I know, no program like this exists yet.

There's nowhere I can't reach.


Good morning, post-apocalyptia!

Last edited by Moguta; Apr 6, 2008 at 01:33 PM.
Spikey
Sierra Music Quester


Member 13178

Level 13.35

Sep 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Apr 7, 2008, 10:50 AM Local time: Apr 8, 2008, 02:20 AM #75 of 108
Good post- I didn't know foobar could use LAME to encode. Got a screenie of it?

I agree with you wholeheartedly. I figured LameDrop was a very simple put together program which just ran default scripts and all you could do pretty much was change the quality- which is all you want "newbs" to be able to do.

I'm also confused about the Standard v Fast thing, I might post on HA about it.


I also agree with LA's comments about command-line encoders (abbreviated to CLE for ease)- I still use CLE's for many things, mainly DVD-Audio decoding (I do a lot of this) and weird format decoding (e.g. MPC).

But we're not talking about us who are PC savvy, we're talking about Joe Audio who doesn't understand what a CLE is, let alone what -v means and isn't likely to post a question here to ask, well, anything.

And I find CLE's confusing and I understand DOS pretty well, and am better-than-OK with PC's. I doubt most newbs would bother, either asking for help, or bothering with CLE's full-stop.

- Spike

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.
Reply

Thread Tools

Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis > Garrmondo Music and Trading > Behind the Music > Guide to Ripping & Encoding High Quality MP3s

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.