Musepack Forums  

Go Back   Musepack Forums > Main > General

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 24 November 2007, 05:56 pm   #1
sexxy
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2
Talking mp3 diferent lame encoders 3.95 3.97 vs. Fraunhofer vs. ogg vs. mpc vs. wma vs. ape

i think/hear/see that .mpc is the best but...
Fraunhofer .mp3 decoded with free Telos Audioactive MP3 Decoder v1.1.2
aadec112.exe
gives an extra edge, but... must listen to decoded .wavs or encode again to lossless .ape/.wma/.flac to preserve the added decoder quality.

the only flaw in .mpc its the swept sine tone test.
------------------------------------------------------
http://forum.rightmark.org/topic.cgi?id=4:971
------------------------------------------------------

usign http://audio.rightmark.org free rmaa5.5

Rmaa 5.5 can create test audio files in .wav
so..
i converted those .wav to .mp3 .ogg .mpc .ape and most others, at high quality...
then decode them back to .wav
and analized them!

i wanted to know::
how much i was lossing,
and also if all diferent mp3 encoders all Lame and Fraunhofer IIS codecs, whats best ?

want to see how a free lame HT gives the most similar output, better than anyother, but lmited to 18.8kHz / 37,6kHz sadly, other .mp3 codecs give 20-20khz but have lots of distortions
what would you choose ?

also RMAA 5.5 results reveal that .mpc --quality 10.00 its almost as good , and its 20-20kHz, file size its smaller than .mp3 but has iMD distortions

also I wanted to know if lossless its really lossless, and .ape its lossless

.wma 44.1khz 16bits 320kbps its really wrong, want to see why ?

if you want to see what does all diferent codecs to your signal ?
want to know for shure whats the best codec
in the .zip file its all the rmaa5.5 .sav files and a text file in .rtf


http://www.gearslutz.com/board/attac...pe-results.zip

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/elect...ma-vs-ape.html
sexxy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 November 2007, 11:30 pm   #2
Shy
Admin
 
Shy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 370
Default

It should be obvious, but: you don't measure an audio codec with your eyes and you don't measure a video codec with your ears. Graphs are nice, but measurement of the actual quality of a codec's output isn't done with graphs. See the 5th paragraph here.
Shy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 04:31 pm.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 2
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.