DJing Discussion

Forum
 DJing Discussion
MAC Users Encoding with LAME
This area is for discussion about DJing in general. Please remember the community rules when posting and try to be polite and inclusive.

MAC Users Encoding with LAME

djtk 2:43 AM - 26 February, 2007
I was doing some research on the forum about encoding with LAME, and i just wanted to make sure how to achieve the best sound quality before I encode the stack of CDs i just bought.

i checked a few threads in this forum about encoding with LAME, and i have discovered that encoding with LAME at a VBR of 320 will give you the best results out of any other setting. anyone else ripping with these settings?
this website seem every convincing on the subject:

www.hydrogenaudio.org

i have also found out that using MAX provides better quality than using itunes with LAME. I checked out the website for MAX and it has a new unstable version along with a stable version. does this mean that the later upgrades will offer better sound quality than the previous version once it becomes stable? i would hate to have to rip all my CDs over again just because one upgrade offers way better sound quality than the previous.

www.sbooth.org

this is usually an ongoing debate on the forum, and the human ear can only decipher better sound quality to a certain degree, but I definitely want to offer the best sound quality that i can.

thanks for all who assist me.
SpinThis! 5:50 AM - 26 February, 2007
There's always a tradeoff. As much as you want to offer the "best" quality, ideally we would all be using wav files if disk space weren't an issue. The fact is, there's twice as many people who aren't quality snobs as those who are. Unless you do a double-blind ABX test, you won't know for sure and most people aren't going to notice negligible increases in bitrate.

On average, 160 kbps generally sounds generally pretty good to me so I usually take it a few steps higher. I've been using iTunes VBR set to 192 (minimum) / highest and that's been pretty decent in terms of size and quality. If you really want to use lame (which is very slow on the Mac and negligible increase in codec quality imo), try alt-present-standard or the preset above that one (I forgot which)... it is called "standard" for a reason.
djtk 7:38 AM - 26 February, 2007
i feel you. i encode at 320 CBR for any CD i buy or vinyl i convert, but some of the CDs i ripped at 320 sound flat for some reason.
airforce1 12:46 PM - 26 February, 2007
the presets are standard, extreme, then insane...... lame is great. the cd rips that i've done with lame sound so much better than i tunes by it's self ... noticably better. mp3s sound crappy enough as it is, anything to improve the quality. don't get rid of those cds either. i think eventually hard drives will have enough space to store ample wav files. they sound much better than mp3s.
djtk 2:53 PM - 26 February, 2007
thanks airforce1. are you ripping with a CBR or VBR?
DJ Stuart (AR) 2:55 PM - 26 February, 2007
That's LAME, man.

www.djstuart.com.ar
djtk 10:58 PM - 26 February, 2007
can any other MAC users help?
a-swift 11:01 PM - 26 February, 2007
yes. i agree djtk.
Daim 12:10 AM - 27 February, 2007
lame alt preset standard is all u need..

but i'm encoding on windows with eac+lame.. didnt find any good host for lame on osx yet..
djtk 12:30 AM - 27 February, 2007
you try out MAX for osx yet Daim?
feniks 7:39 AM - 27 February, 2007
LAME is really the industry standard in MP3 encoding. as to which presets actually produce the "best" encodings....well that depends on who you ask. i'm of the belief that the best encoding is done with 320 bitrate using CBR and the "-0" preset with normal stero mode. alot of others believe that VBR is actually better (nik can give you alot of info about this type of encoding--as does www.hydrogenaudio.org). in my experience however, i have found that if you are going to be playing on a big club system it is best to encode at 320 as there are some noticeable sound quality drops (especially in the lower frequencies) that can be noticed if encoded at lower bitrates.

i use these presets (which i set manually): -q0 -b320 -ms

that being said, i use Lame Brain for my mac encoding (i think i am using LAME version 3.90....although i can't remember for sure right now--some versions are better than other.....). hope this helps.
hustlas 7:58 AM - 27 February, 2007
blacktree.com

works well with mac on iTunes.
brett rock 8:12 AM - 27 February, 2007
i downloaded MAX for OSX. if i did that, does it mean that im encoding on lame by default? i click on max in the tool bar, i then click on components and it shows lame, flac, wavpack, speex, monkeys audio and libsnfile. im not sure what all of these do. in preferences, it doesnt allow me to choose one as a default or whatever, so i assume it uses lame encoding automatically since lame appears to be a component of the max program.

can someone help me make sense of this? i got max after reading some theads here.

thanks,
brett rock 8:25 AM - 27 February, 2007
and.... max allows you to send whatever you have encoded to itunes after completion by default. will itunes have any effect on the newly encoded mp3 from max? i wont reencode a second time will it?

thanks,
djtk 4:21 PM - 28 February, 2007
thanks feniks. i'm currently ripping everything at 320 CBR, just not with LAME. where do you enter those presets? i don't see that option in MAX to change the presets. are those for itunes with LAME?

you're correct brett rock. check the components, it automatically encodes LAME.
ABM 4:56 PM - 28 February, 2007
just to add to this, there is a 2 step process that i tell myself i am going to follow.

step 1 - store the original in a lossless compressed format (FLAC)
step 2 - convert FLAC to MP3 using LAME at 320 CBR (like feniks said) or at Extreme VBR.

The advantage is that you save storage space with step 1 but don't sacrifice any quality assuming your digital audio extraction went well.
hustlas 4:14 AM - 1 March, 2007
iv been converting at kps, does it really make alot of difference in audio quality compared to vbr or cbr?
Konix 4:26 AM - 1 March, 2007
Here's a great guide for iTunes LAME...

alpharuin.blogspot.com

In general, VBR > CBR at all bitrates, except when using full 320kpbs.
joerockets 5:47 AM - 1 March, 2007
does anyone know if VBR puts more load on the CPU during decoding/playback?
SpinThis! 5:52 AM - 1 March, 2007
decoding vbr is negligible if any. ssl has to do a full quick scan of the mp3 initially which probably takes more cpu time but after it does an initial scan, it saves that data (which is why you'll see subsequent loads of the song are quicker).

I never understood why people use 320 kbs... the whole point of mp3 is saving disk space at the expense of quality. If you go that high why not use vorbis or aac? (the former or which is supported in ssl.)
djtk 5:54 PM - 2 March, 2007
thanks for everyones help. i guess 320 CBR it is for me.
DJMark 6:39 AM - 3 March, 2007
Max is what I've been using since version 0.70 came out (the first one I felt was stable enough to be usable). It's using the LAME 3.97 version and is a Universal Binary, while the Blacktree "iTunes-LAME" is still back on the older LAME 3.95.1 and is not Universal.

Max is incredibly fast on a Mac Pro, and seems to do a good job making use of all four CPU's. It takes about 30 seconds to encode a 6-minute song at CBR 320 in the highest-quality mode, and will do four songs at once at that same speed.

I also use Media Rage to strip out the Version 1.X ID3 tags on all the files, and making sure all the V2.X tags are version 2.3.
DJMark 6:55 AM - 3 March, 2007
Quote:
I never understood why people use 320 kbs


After doing a *lot* of critical listening tests, I came to the conclusion that 320 CBR is less likely to cause noticeable degradation than any VBR setting. That's all the reason I need right there. If SSL supported FLAC or some other lossless format, I'd probably start using that. Drive space is (relatively) cheap.
djtk 4:45 PM - 3 March, 2007
Quote:
Max is what I've been using since version 0.70 came out (the first one I felt was stable enough to be usable). It's using the LAME 3.97 version and is a Universal Binary, while the Blacktree "iTunes-LAME" is still back on the older LAME 3.95.1 and is not Universal.

Max is incredibly fast on a Mac Pro, and seems to do a good job making use of all four CPU's. It takes about 30 seconds to encode a 6-minute song at CBR 320 in the highest-quality mode, and will do four songs at once at that same speed.

I also use Media Rage to strip out the Version 1.X ID3 tags on all the files, and making sure all the V2.X tags are version 2.3.


whats the main reason for stripping the version 1.X ID3 tags DJMark?

thanks for all your help.
DJMark 12:16 AM - 4 March, 2007
Quote:
whats the main reason for stripping the version 1.X ID3 tags DJMark?


Headache reduction. I've had irritating issues in the past when trying to edit tags on files with version 1.x tags, and the updated information mysteriously not showing up in SSL or elsewhere.

Also if for some reason you need to edit tags in iTunes, eliminating all the version 1.x tags makes the editing process go much quicker...if the files have 1.x tags there are annoying lags when adding/updating information.

ID3 version 1 is a very old and limited specification (among other things, limited to 30 characters in title/artist fields), and unless you're also using your files in very old players that predate version 2, there's no good reason to have version 1 tags in the files.