Best MP3 Setting

What is the best setting for MP3 Conversion?

Highest Quality Variable Bit Rate Setting vs 320 kbps Constant Bit Rate?

I'm looking for the best quality out of these, not concerned with the size issue with either.

Why is one better than the other?

Thanks
Brian

It may depend on the material you're encoding, because whether it's dynamic, and contains percussive sounds with high frequency transients, will come out differently with different settings and even different encoders.  Presumably you're referring to the mp3Pro encoder included in AA3, but some here swear by LAME.  The results are definitely not the same.

How do you add LAME capability to AA3?

Get 'cool_lame.flt' and the 'lame_enc.dll' and put them in the root directory of Audition.  This works for any version.

To get you started, explore this link.

For an interesting old discussion, read this Audiomasters thread.

Thanks so much.  I appreciate the help!

Get 'cool_lame.flt' and the 'lame_enc.dll' and put them in the root directory of Audition.  This works for any version.

To get you started, explore this link.

For an interesting old discussion, read this Audiomasters thread.

Didn't see a "cool_lame.flt" file in either zip download.

It may depend on the material you're encoding, because whether it's dynamic, and contains percussive sounds with high frequency transients, will come out differently with different settings and even different encoders.  Presumably you're referring to the mp3Pro encoder included in AA3, but some here swear by LAME.  The results are definitely not the same.

Not the same how? are you saying that LAME is better?

"Didn't see a "cool_lame.flt" file in either zip download."

Me either, I couldn't find it or get it to work with what was in the zip file.......any suggestions anyone?

Look a little more carefully, guys.  In the first link I provided, no doubt you saw the download link for the Cool Lame filter.  The zip archive contains all the resources for programmers in the root level, and the actual filter file is in the "Release" folder.

Is LAME actually better?  Well, it depends on your material, like I said earlier.  It all has to do with the time smearing inherent in perceptual coding, and the resultant loss of believability in the high frequencies.  LAME definitely approaches this is a different manner than Frauenhofer, so the one thing I can promise is that the result will be different.  The only way you'll know for sure which is better is to try both methods for yourself.  I did find an instance where LAME obviously sounded better only to find that the files wouldn't play properly in other players because of inaccurate bitrate and length reporting.  I don't know if that's the fault of the Cool Lame frontend or the actual codec.  Just try the finished results in any player you'd want to use it in and you'll know what you have.  I've had no such problems in the built-in mp3Pro codec in any version of Audition or Cool Edit Pro.

Invert-paste testing is difficult with mp3s, but if you can create a 1- or 2-sample click in your source file and use it to line up an invert-paste procedure, combining the reopened encoded file inverted against the source, you'll find that seeing (in spectral view) and hearing the coding losses is very instructive.

Ahhh the details, so there it is right in the "Release" folder!! Got it to work, thanks so much.

I definitely see a difference in the encoded music in the Spectral Display when comparing FLAC vs FHG (at the highest VBR setting) and LAME (at the INSANE setting).....LAME doesn't seem to lose as much of the higher frequency as FHG, although I'm still deciding if I have a noticeable sound difference for me.

Thanks for the quick reply and the help!

I, too, appreciate the help, MusicConductor.  Right before our very eyes . . . just need to look .

Ok new question here on using the LAME settings....

I can only get it to encode at VBR no matter what setting I change in the options menu after selecting the encoder. If I select "Fast Medium", or "Insane" or CBR at whatever,  I am getting the same results of VBR 217 kbps for this particular song.

Any ideas why? 

Still haven't gotten the LAME settings figured out yet......sometimes i get VBR sometimes I get a CBR???

also noticed that mp3pro encodes with Blade, it makes a smaller file, but seems to keep higher frequencies than FHG or LAME....but the file size is much smaller than either.....just curious how Blade is looked upon by others? is it considered a good encoder?

With LAME there are carefully developed presets, intended to optimize encoding for various purposes, including high quality music. It is not possible to reproduce the exact results of the presets through use of the (many) switches LAME provides; the presets are written in at the program code level. They have been developed through years of work.

I have never attempted to use LAME within CoolEdit, so I don’t know what access to the presets and switches this gives one. One can do LAME command line executions, but there are also a number of freeware GUI programs that make encoding and decoding, of a single file, or any number of files in batch, very simple, using either the presets or any of the switches.

The main place for information about LAME is here, when the developers hang out,
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=7516

You can also learn about blind ABX testing via a number of freeware programs. This is the ONLY valid way to determine if you really hear any differences. I think I have also provided a number of other links in a few posts in this forum. They may or may not be helpful in your pursuits.

Here are my personal thoughts on FhG vs. LAME...

For anything low-bitrate, I prefer LAME.  I have yet to find an instance where I think FhG does better below 192kbps.

With higher bitrates, it really depends on the source material.  For solo voice or instrument, I generally prefer FhG.  And for highly compressed music (most modern music), I prefer FhG.  For more dynamic material, like a symphony performance or even music prior to 1990 (when there were still dynamics), I think LAME performs better.

Emmett 

You're welcome for the help, guys, and thanks Andy & Emmett for chiming in, because in spite of my earlier posts, I've really very little experience with LAME.