Why not VBR?

[wonderboy2005]

earlier tonight, i decided that once i have my ipod, i will want my CD collection on it too (along with the exponetially larger collection of downloaded music). so i went and downloaded CDex, and ripped half a dozen CDs at VBR 128-320 at the highest settings of everything. they turned out great. they sound better than anything ive downloaded, yet on average are about 2/3 the size. they turned out to be just a little bigger than 128k Mp3s.

so my question is, why dont more people use VBR? fewer people would complain about quality, and fewer people would complain about filesize. everyone wins. so why not? all i can ever download is CBR 128, 160, 192, and the occasional 256 & 320. why???

[method77]

it depends on the client that you are downloading from. Some clients have more VBR than regular files

[notbob]

i get vbrs all the time--it's all about where you look

[wonderboy2005]

well... where should i look? those big hubs you get into wont work for me... i have a total of 90 gigs of space, but of that, im able to share maybe a 5-6 gigs.

[method77]

if it's pop stuff you are looking for then there is no need of getting in those hubs. If not, well.... share more

[notbob]

didn't you ever hear of chris myden and ubernet?

[wonderboy2005]

i wouldnt touch most pop stuff with a ten foot pole. and yes i have heard of chris myden and ubernet. i never really gave it much thought though... maybe i will.

[method77]

start your thinking here (http://www.chrismyden.com/uber/)

[wonderboy2005]

start your thinking here (http://www.chrismyden.com/uber/)
already ahead of you :)

so i take it that one, or maybe both of you have access to this hub? if so, how many people are generally on it?

[isus]

more people don't use vbr because many 'average joes' are happy enough to put a cd in the drive, wait for mmjb to launch, and then press record>start. they never play with the settings.

[que-em]

more people don't use vbr because many 'average joes' are happy enough to put a cd in the drive, wait for mmjb to launch, and then press record>start. they never play with the settings.


I was just about to say something similar to that. Most people who use kazaa see the bitrate as 128 so they just assume that's what it is supposed to be. Like you say they could use vbr and it will allocate the bits not needed where there is greater need producing a higher quality music file at relatively the same size. If they are going to use CBR they should at least start at 160-192 because you can tell the difference.

[RJ5500]

Ugh. MMJB sucks!

It came with some JaMP3 portable audio player I got for a gift a few years ago.

Damn, I don't like that brand.

128k is barely listenable to me. I download a minimum of 192k songs these days unless 128k quality is the only option I have. I've tried DC, but it's no good for a dial-up user.

VBR is great. I usually rip my audio CDs into two formats. The first is 224k VBR (with Lame 3.93) and the second is VBR Mp4s.

Nero 6 does a great job of creating "audiophile" Mp4s.

[phalkon30]

I think most people are not aware of VBR, it also takes longer to encode.

I do 32-320k mp3's...is there any advantage to setting the low end higher? I get insanely small file sizes for near cd quality music.

One other thing, some networks (like kazaa) don't display vbr well. It will display the first frames bitrate, which can make it look like a really crappy mp3.

[wonderboy2005]

VBR is great. I usually rip my audio CDs into two formats. The first is 224k VBR (with Lame 3.93) and the second is VBR Mp4s.

Nero 6 does a great job of creating "audiophile" Mp4s.
mp4's huh? arent mp4's and AAC files one in the same? what sort of file sizes do you end up with when encoding to mp4? assuming relitively similar quality to the VBR mp3's you produce also?

phalk - i doubt there really is an advantage to having the low end higher... when seting CDex up, i was fiddling around with some settings and accidentally set it bact to a low of 128, and didnt notice till i ripped all of the CDs.

with ubernet, like any P2P app, i dont want to share the popular RIAA controlled stuff. but that pretty much eliminates everthing in my collection. however, my parents have a bunch of country music that isnt under the riaa's control. would they look down on this? ripping music for the sole purpose of getting into the hub?

i dunno...i think ill just stick with my current ways until i get to college.

[origin]

mp3 vbr sounds like thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis much better to my ears, I mean I might be def in one of them(j/k) but it shure sounds good :gj. It not only sounds good but it has a smaller filesize so also makes for a swifter download. The reason I believe vbr files are not that frequently available on p2p networks as much as the common dredfull(128 kbps CBR format) is because it is a knowledge issue if I as the end user knew the difference betwen the 2 formats and understood why I should stick with a VBR encoded file rather than a bulky CBR file I would of course go with the more effcient(sounding) smaller file sized mp3. So the problem of that most of the p2p comminity in technical details that retain to this issue therfore they shall stick to the sh**y formats, But we as the educated ones would go for quality and provide quality because we expose it for all it is worth.good day.

l8

[begoodbebad]

earlier tonight, i decided that once i have my ipod, i will want my CD collection on it too (along with the exponetially larger collection of downloaded music). so i went and downloaded CDex, and ripped half a dozen CDs at VBR 128-320 at the highest settings of everything. they turned out great. they sound better than anything ive downloaded, yet on average are about 2/3 the size. they turned out to be just a little bigger than 128k Mp3s.

so my question is, why dont more people use VBR? fewer people would complain about quality, and fewer people would complain about filesize. everyone wins. so why not? all i can ever download is CBR 128, 160, 192, and the occasional 256 & 320. why???


If you are on the ed2k network try fileheaven music forums (http://www.fileheaven.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=12&sid=5cedfcc6ce34379a4d15f15677720482) .

You can find all sorts of stuff, plenty is vbr.

Also try the link in my sig.

[Rickio]

mp3 vbr is the best as far as mp3 format is concerned. According to tests that you can read about at hydrogenaudio.com the .mpc, .ogg, .mp4 formats all beat mp3 in sound quality.

Here is a guide I ran accross for making mp4's using EAC and a little app called nencode that was written about at hydrogeonaudio.

http://krazyd.50free.net/aac.htm

mpc is a great format but seems to have stalled in it's development now. So ogg and mp4 are looking to be the best in the long run now.

Mostly techies and people who love to play with new stuff will jump into this now. It is though the format based on mp3 that will be gaining in attention and in quality in the near future.



peace

[RJ5500]

mp3 vbr is the best as far as mp3 format is concerned. According to tests that you can read about at hydrogenaudio.com the .mpc, .ogg, .mp4 formats all beat mp3 in sound quality.

Here is a guide I ran accross for making mp4's using EAC and a little app called nencode that was written about at hydrogeonaudio.

http://krazyd.50free.net/aac.htm

mpc is a great format but seems to have stalled in it's development now. So ogg and mp4 are looking to be the best in the long run now.

Mostly techies and people who love to play with new stuff will jump into this now. It is though the format based on mp3 that will be gaining in attention and in quality in the near future.

peace





Yes, I've read a of interesting information on sound formats in the hydrogenaudio forums. I've found Mp4 is a truely grand audio format (compared to Mp3).


mp4's huh? arent mp4's and AAC files one in the same? what sort of file sizes do you end up with when encoding to mp4? assuming relitively similar quality to the VBR mp3's you produce also?



I do believe there are some differences between the Mp4/AAC format (other than the obvious difference of file extention).

I did some comparisons between Mp4, Mp3, and OGG compression for the same sound file (wav). In this test, all three of these formats were encoded with VBR.

The results are as follows:
---------------------------

Length of song - 3:52
Filesize of .wav: 40,931,900 (about 41 megabytes)


MP3 (encoded with 224k VBR Lame 3.93)
Average bitrate: 189 Kb/s
Filesize: 5,506,894 (about 5.5 megabytes)

MP4 (encoded with 250-300 Kb/s VBR highest quality encoding ("Transcoding"),
"low complexity AAC profile" in Nero 6)
Average bitrate: 275 Kb/s
Filesize: 8,042,911 (about 8 megabytes)

Ogg Vorbis (.OGG) (encoded with VBR "quality" setting to maximum in Nero 6)
Average bitrate: 458 Kb/s
Filesize: 13,298,726 (a little more than 13 megabytes)

As you can see from this test of one file, the filesize of a mp4 file is not too much greater than a bit less desirable mp3 file. And then there's the huge .ogg file. With my ears (and from a lot of my speakers/headphones), I cannot tell the difference between the ogg and the mp4.

That's another reason I stuck to using mp4 files as well as mp3s. The ogg is a whole lot bigger per file than even the mp4 for roughly the same sound quality. I'm no hardcore audiophile and I'm sure people at the hydrogenaudio forums would have a strong opinion on which format is better.

[shawners]

People on some programs only see 192kbs. IT may not be listed, i am downloading tons of stuff that are variable byte rate at 192 Lame. The songs are labeled at the end with their byte rate and compression.

[wonderboy2005]

well what i am getting at with the mp4/AAC question is what can i play on my (well soon to be my) ipod? if i remember correctly, the ipod can play AAC files. it almost has to... since i think you can get music from apple's music store in AAC... i could be wrong though. space isnt that big of an issue... im getting the 40GB one, and i have a little less than 20GB of music. so i have ~20GB to play with. second of all, i want quality. i dont know what kind of quality nero produces, but i do know that EAC or CDex both rip great mp3s (with Lame ofcourse). so what can the ipod play that would be the best format?

[ditto_n]

are there any good vbr waste or Dc hubs that I can get in good with somone here for? Im also open to Monkeys Lossless or Ogg, rock/metal is my style if that helps refine it any.

[Rickio]

well what i am getting at with the mp4/AAC question is what can i play on my (well soon to be my) ipod? if i remember correctly, the ipod can play AAC files. it almost has to... since i think you can get music from apple's music store in AAC... i could be wrong though. space isnt that big of an issue... im getting the 40GB one, and i have a little less than 20GB of music. so i have ~20GB to play with. second of all, i want quality. i dont know what kind of quality nero produces, but i do know that EAC or CDex both rip great mp3s (with Lame ofcourse). so what can the ipod play that would be the best format?

AAC and MP4 are the same , or as it's been explained in other forums MP4 is a container for AAC files and the reason MP4 would be better is that it supports tags where as AAC files do not.

Someone who know's more might fill us in but from what I remember ipod uses another extension for the mp4 files. I think its m4a but it is a mp4 file.

The new winamp 5 can encode ipod compatible ACC files, I just noticed that.

Nero should also be able to make ipod compatible files as well, but I understand a few tagging bugs etc. are addressed in the next upgrade.


peace

[eBwoy]

Amazing as it may seem to some of us here, VBR is not known by that many people, but makes perfect sense to use - most 192 files have a lot of wasted bitrate - I use LAME3.93@192vbrHQs and get great quality/size ratios.

However, I've noticed it gaining popularity and it'll kick in soon, slowly but surely.

The other more serious problem, which is now a thing of the past, was that earlier decoder developers didn't abide by the proper rules of MP3 standards in their portable players. This resulted in some earlier players not playing VBR files properly. The earlier decoders just assumed a constant bitrate from the start - naughty - but now mainly just history.

[big otis]

could you guys help a out a av challenged droog, i would love to know what your talking about, where can i go to get some schoolin on this kind of thing, seriously, what i do is just dwnld files and bring them to windows media player to burn them to a disk. id love to learn more about what your talking about. any direction would be greatly appreciated. thanks.

[eBwoy]

could you guys help a out a av challenged droog, i would love to know what your talking about, where can i go to get some schoolin on this kind of thing, seriously, what i do is just dwnld files and bring them to windows media player to burn them to a disk. id love to learn more about what your talking about. any direction would be greatly appreciated. thanks.
I've just had a look around, and wreckon some of these links may help - so try the following . .

http://www.mp3-cdburner.com/MP3-glossary.shtml
http://www.mp3-cdburner.com/MP3-Tutorials-and-Articles.shtml

Err - a very informative (technical) explaination of the MP3 format can be found here . .
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/mp3/chapter/ch02.html

As-per-usual, there are no quick fixes to what you're asking, no geezer here can possibly furnish you with magical info that anyone will understand in two seconds. It's deeper than that and requires a little proactiveness on an individuals part (ooer) .. .

[Rickio]

could you guys help a out a av challenged droog, i would love to know what your talking about, where can i go to get some schoolin on this kind of thing, seriously, what i do is just dwnld files and bring them to windows media player to burn them to a disk. id love to learn more about what your talking about. any direction would be greatly appreciated. thanks.

Like most computer stuff, it's all about learning on the fly as new stuff comes down all the time.

Try these forums to learn a bit.

http://forums.afterdawn.com/

http://hydrogenaudio.org

http://doc.hydrogenaudio.org/wikis/hydrogenaudio/FrontPage Here is a link to a area you can begin reading. I include this as it might take you awhile to find it.

explore those forums there is a wealth of info there.

[phalkon30]

I don't think its all that difficult with CDEX. Set to VBR, I do 32-320kbps, alt -preset standard while using LAME.

[Rickio]

I don't think its all that difficult with CDEX. Set to VBR, I do 32-320kbps, alt -preset standard while using LAME.

Check this page out. http://rarewares.hydrogenaudio.org/mp3.html

Scroll down and you will find a couple modified versions of lame.

These 2; LAME 3.90.3 dll modified to encode PRESET STANDARD ONLY 2003-10-29

LAME 3.90.3 dll modified to encode PRESET EXTREME ONLY 2003-11-03

These will save a newbie from wondering if they got the switches right.

[big otis]

I just bookmarked all these links, looks like a lot of reading to do. thanks for all the help, if im not back in 2 days then its just because my brain has been burnt beyond all recognition.

[Lehk]

I usually rip at 192 CBR using LAME (version 1.27 Engine 3.92 alpha 1 MMX) with q=0 (the highest encoding quality mode) and it almost always sounds near perfect, even the hard-to-encode songs like certain Green Day songs that like to come out all hissy and screwed up due many mp3 encoders(FHG-Radium) being crappy.