|
|
Posted by sdavmor on 11/28/05 17:17
david wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am starting an online label for high quality mp3 downloads and
> was wondering what "real people" think about some questions I have.
> The main question is: what quality settings should I use for
> encoding? I'm using 'lame' as my encoder and have been looking at
> the presets available. As my aim is to offer music with the best
> available audio quality, I have been using the "insane" preset,
> which theoretically goes up to 320 kbps. One CD I encoded--about 1
> hr in length--came in at around 138 MB, so a little more than
> twice the size of what seems to be the de facto standard.
IMO the de facto standard for MP3s is out of date. Fine, I suppose,
for listening on a PC, or even for sticking on a portable MP3 player,
but not for long-term listening or for playback through a decent home
stereo system.
> If you are familiar with lame you're probably wondering which
> version I have, and unfortunately it's on my other computer, sorry.
> 2.something. Also, I have had trouble with the tagging
> functionality--couldn't get it to parse the command line correctly
> in either the bash or dos shell. So.. any general tips are
> appreciated. Just surfing around, I noticed a front-end called
> Razorlame. Is it any good? Anyway, time for a poll!
RazorLame is an excellent easy-to-use front-end shell for the LAME
encoder. Try these "custom settings" once you get it installed (they
also will work fine in Exact Audio Copy):
-m j -q 0 -V 0 -b 128 -B 320 --lowpass 20.0 --scale .98 --ns-sfb21 3
-X3 --nspsytune --nssafejoint --athtype 2
If you change the -q 0 to -q 2 your encode will be faster, but not
audibly different IMO. You should find these files will sound better
and be smaller than CBR/256 encodes, and sound as good as the
"insane" encodes while being somewhat smaller.
Upgrade your LAME encoder to the very latest release (3.97 IIRC), and
ignore any error messages that RazorLame gives you:
<http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/>
For tagging functionality you could try this rather good piece of
freeware called TagScanner. Get it here:
<http://www.download.com/TagScanner/3000-2141_4-10354245.html>
> As a listener, can you tell the difference in encoding quality at
> different bitrates and other settings?
I think I can, with some obvious caveats like equipment quality,
comparing very high quality to not so high quality, etc. Location
(home stereo vs in the car), etc. Under most normal listening
conditions if I'm not focused on the music, I probably can't tell
the difference in anything up and beyond 192/CBR.
> Would you be more or less likely to purchase an album at 138 MB vs.
> 60 MB, assuming the larger file would have noticeably better
> audio?
60MB? If you're talking about an hour long album, then I can tell you
right now the sound quality will be less than acceptable if I'm paying
$$$ for it. I think that unless someone is using dial-up the issue's
a non-starter. If you want people to part with their money for
downloads, then you've got to got with the better quality larger files.
> What would you like to see in an online distributor that is not
> already being addressed by the major players?
No clue. Sorry.
> Thanks in advance for any advice!
You might want to also get a hold of these three additional useful MP3
tools. (1) MP3TrimPro, (2) MP3Gain and VBRFix. The first will trim
any extraneous dead air front and back from MP3s. The second will
allow you to deal with perceived volume levels without artificial
"volume normalizing". The third will rebuild the VBR header block,
ensuring maximum compatibility across players, so that little things
like the length of a tune encoded as VBR gets reported properly. All
three are well worth checking out. I find them essential, but YMMV.
Get MP3TrimPro here:
<http://www.mptrim.com/>
Get MP3Gain here:
<http://mp3gain.sourceforge.net/>
Get VBRFix here:
<http://www.willwap.co.uk/Programs/vbrfix.php>
> Lastly, if you would like to join my "spam list", email me with the
> words "SPAM ME" in the subject. I am hoping to launch officially
> on or before 12/18/05, but I will probably be announcing only on
> rec.music.progressive, which is most appropriate for my current
> focus musically.
>
> Best Regards, David Oskardmay
--
Cheers,
SDM -- a 21st century schizoid man
Systems Theory internet music project links:
soundclick <www.soundclick.com/systemstheory>
garageband <http://www.garageband.com/artist/systemstheory>
"Soundtracks For Imaginary Movies" CD released Dec 2004
"Codetalkers" CD coming end of 2005
NP: nothing
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|