Re: 44.1kHz, 64Kbps, CBR mono encoding question

Hi Jaroslav,

You mentioned the mode parameter tuning of LAME.  That's something I  
know very little about.  Is there any overview advice you can give  
about that?

-Stevo Brock
  Head of Development
  Monkey Tools
  www.monkey-tools.com




On Oct 19, 2007, at 1:57 PM, Jaroslav Lukesh wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stevo Brock" <stevo-MIc6wW5p4IAu+uzj59/[email protected]>
>> We are trying to use LAME to encode a WAVE file to a 44.1kHz, 64Kbps,
>> CBR mono mp3 file and are having trouble matching the quality of the
>> same file produced by ProTools.
>>
>> Currently we are using the following settings:
>> Source file 44.1kHz
>> 64Kbps
>> CBR
>> Stereo Mode Mono
>> Quality: 9
>>
>> which gets us pretty close, but there are still some slight audible
>> artifacts.  The ProTools file has no audible artifacts at all.
>>
>
> Lame is no good encoder for bitrates <160 kbps CBR or <130 kbps ABR.
> Fastencc (as reference highest possible quality encoder) which is  
> part of
> protools (if you mean ten-thousands$$$ musical HW&SW of course), is  
> the best
> for low bitrates as inet audio streaming etc.
>
> Lame needs mode parameters tuning, as move ATH, different ATH  
> curves etc.
> And of course, fastencc does not use MDCT at highest quality mode, but
> different algorithm, which gave not only spectral waves, but it  
> relys on
> phase shifts too.
>
> Now I hear all audio academics with long titles before and after their
> names, that ear does not recognize phase shifts... Yes, of course,  
> ear does
> not recognize phaseshifts at sinusoidal signal, persist from  
> bigbang to
> collapse of universe. But music is DYNAMIC with transients and here  
> ear
> should hear tones which is in some cases more than 30 dB under  
> popular audio
> "0dB" curves. And transients without original phase shifts are not  
> right
> formed transients, but something totally different. ANd there your  
> ear and
> brain does not recognize tones as with original signal.
>
> You should make some tests for that: you should need very good audio
> equipment (good <> astronomical price!), rather studio grade with  
> even worse
> parameters than Hi-End with 0,000000001% sinusoidal distortion. Now  
> you can
> listen for example R&B with deep plucked bass sounds at levels  
> about 30dB.
> Yeah, you should hear these deep bass sounds! So public theory  
> about ATH
> curves lies for that.
>
> Studio grade equipments are constructed for transient signal which  
> does not
> have easy to measurable parameters, if any. But it have maximum sound
> reality. Noise and sinusoidal distortion are not the main  
> parameter. Hi-End
> grade audio are constructed to reproduce sinusoidal signals which  
> have nice
> easy to measure parameters, but it doesnot reproduce natural sound  
> as is.
>
> If you want high quality, use studio equipment and does not look at  
> their
> technical parameters. Total output S/N of mixer like 80dB, THD  
> about 0,01%
> is normal... Yes, but it sounds BETTER than any Hi-End.
>
> Regards, JL.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mp3encoder mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
>