YAT on Quality Encoding with Lame

Simply, does anybody recommend using Q1 as a parameter in Lame, rather than Q2. Any difference really audible?
Thank you!

I did this for a couple of songs - but with other settings as well, and couldn't tell the difference.

Check out the info at r3mix.net - but take it with a grain of salt and make sure to read elsewhere.

That said and done, all my songs are currently encoded with slightly modified r3mix (it's a VBR preset built into LAME). Basically I remove the normalizing parameter and kick the minimum bitrate up to 112kbit (the r3mix site breaks down the preset and shows you which commands it specifies - I use those commands passed to the LAME command-line exe from Audiograbber)

Bruno

Ok, I ripped the same cd with q2 and q1 . Q1 ripps are 1- 3 bytes larger. Yes, that little. Since I am not in a hurry when I encode cds, than I decided to use q1assuming that it may not be much better, but it is not going to be worst for sure.
I'll make a listening test and decide if there is some sort of audible difference, anyway.

Q1 ripps are 1- 3 bytes larger.

If I understand this discussion correctly, you're talking about the encoder analysis quality setting, not a bit rate setting. So I would not expect the resulting files to be any different in size at all.

I don't have the lame parameter documentation in front of me at the moment, so I can't check what this parameter is supposed to do. But if it's a quality setting as I suspect, then you should always use the highest available setting when encoding. It will take longer to encode, but it won't make the files any bigger and the result will be that the encoded file sounds more like the original than if you did it at the faster setting.

There is very little difference between the two when used alone, I think the difference only comes into play for some ath types, and not others. I think the developers abandoned the original function of this switch a long time ago. In other words, ask the developers on the mp3 encoder mailing list, or the people on r3mix.

Sean

Yes, you are understanding correctly what we are saying.
Maybe the increase in size depends on the fact that I used CDEx with Q1 settings and AudioGrabber with Q2 . I have no other explanation. Anyway, I'll use q0 then, since, as I said, I don't care about time needed for encoding.
Thank you!

Hello,

--r3mix is now for 3.91 a more or less out-dated presetting. One of the most tweaked setting is now based around the --alt-preset [standard/fast/insane]. The --alt-preset standard delivers 'archiving' quality VBR's around av. 160kbits.

I don't know anymore where to find the exact information, but you can try with google using : r3mix lame --alt-preset

Good luck

Thank you everybody for your suggestions.

I am making several tests, since I do think this is all extremely subjective, not to mention the fact that all depends also on your car, installation,c omponents, etc. So, and I am trying to stay away for pre-settings and go parameter by parameter. I never liked VBR for some reason, even though it seems that now they are convenient, if properly configured in lame. Now, I am still encoding at FBR, 256 usually. I put q0 since I don't mind if it takes more time, so if that setting can increase the quality even by little, it's welcome. Now I am facing the frequency filters issue. What happens if I get rid of them, or if I change the default configuration somehow? Has anybody tried this? Does the size increase, and if so, by how much? I know this info is available in modre than on website etc, but I was hoping to get some "non-religious" and practical experience from you.

Thank you!

I don't use change the settings one by one anymore becuase they change the settings and what they do all the time, and don't document it. I dont have the time to read up on all their changes anymore, so I leave all the tweaking to dibrom (-alt preset) and r3mix (who hasn't been active with tweaking) Don't believe everything dibrom says about the r3mix setting being obsolete, it still does at great job at lower bitrates than the alt preset settings. However, with HD space getting so cheap, I guess it doesn't matter all that much.