Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro,uk.rec.audio
[email protected] invalid@invalid.invalid is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default LAME conversion to MP3

This message follows on from a previous message to this forum. I need
confirmation that I have used the right parameters saving to MP3, and
that the audio quality of the MP3 file is as good as that of the WAV
file.

This message pertains to; http://c-compiler.com/myfiles/a-mp3.zip

The original WAV is at; x.wav

I have converted this file to MP3. Please listen to; x.mp3

According to Windows Media Player, the bit rate of the source file is
192 Kbps, see "windows-media-player.jpg"

According to VLC, the source file has sample rate 48,000 Hz and bits
per sample 16. This particular codec (IMA WAV ADPCM Audio) actually
has 4 bits per sample, but this is decompressed to 16 bits per sample.
See "vlc.jpg".

According to MediaInfo, the source file has sample rate 48,000 Hz and
bit rate 192 kb/s, with a bit depth of 4 bits (which is decompressed
to 16 bits, as noted above), see "mediainfo.jpg".

According to Total Recorder, the source file has sample rate 48,000 Hz
and bit depth 4 bits, see "totalrecorder.jpg".

I use the LAME encoder with Total Recorder to convert the WAV to MP3,
see "totalrecorderA.jpg".

The media format in Total Recorder specifies sample rate 48,000 Hz and
bit rate 192. This is in keeping with the parameters for the source
WAV file, see "totalrecorderB.jpg".

Finally, opening the new MP3 file (converted from WAV) gives the
screen shown in "totalrecorderC.jpg". Bit rate for the MP3 is 192
kbit/s and sample rate is 48,000 Hz.


There are essentially two questions I need to ask.

(1) I have used the parameters for the source WAV file when creating
the MP3 file. Is this a sensible approach? Audio quality is top
priority.

(2) Please tell me if the audio in the MP3 file is as clear as with
the WAV. I think it is, but I would like to be re-assured.

The words on the recording are, "people like that should be .... I
know, they should be homeless".

Thank you for responses.
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro,uk.rec.audio
[email protected] invalid@invalid.invalid is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default LAME conversion to MP3

On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 11:04:04 +1300, geoff
wrote:

On 20/02/2020 10:48 am, lid wrote:
This message follows on from a previous message to this forum. I need
confirmation that I have used the right parameters saving to MP3, and
that the audio quality of the MP3 file is as good as that of the WAV
file.


An MP3 can *never* have as good quality as its source WAV file.

That said 192kHz can be pretty much 'as good' for most people on average
playback systems.


Yeah, the bit rate of the source file is 192 Kbps, so creating an MP3
file with the same bit rate is obviously the best thing to do.

Surely you are still over-thinking this. S


I'm not an expert at computer audio, and value the thoughts of people
more knowledgeable than myself.

(1) I have used the parameters for the source WAV file when creating
the MP3 file. Is this a sensible approach? Audio quality is top
priority.


Yes.


(2) Please tell me if the audio in the MP3 file is as clear as with
the WAV. I think it is, but I would like to be re-assured.


Probably not quite the same, but nothing glaringly different. Most
people wouldn't know or care.

The words on the recording are, "people like that should be .... I
know, they should be homeless".

Thank you for responses.


Given the quality of the source material, does it matter ? Or is the
objective to enable people to have the best shot at picking out the words.


Yes, I want good audio quality, to allow people to hear on the MP3 the
same words which are on the source WAV.

Also if the WAV is 83KB and the resultant MP3 93KB, what is the point of
making it an MP3 in the first place - player compatibility maybe ?


Exactly. The source WAV doesn't work with MS Edge and other browsers,
whereas the created MP3 should work with everything.
  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro,uk.rec.audio
Brian Gaff \(Sofa 2\) Brian Gaff \(Sofa 2\) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default LAME conversion to MP3

One of the big problems you see are many cycles of conversion, and this
then adds some awful artefacts such as a gritiness or a modulation in out
tones and the swizzle effect in stereo where the phase is mangled in a
similar way to what happens to treble on a stretched cassette tape as it
snakes across the head. Another issue is just dull and uninteresting audio.
Its fine for non critical stuff, but I'd not want it to be used in a very
dynamic situation.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"geoff" wrote in message
...
On 20/02/2020 10:48 am,
lid wrote:
This message follows on from a previous message to this forum. I need
confirmation that I have used the right parameters saving to MP3, and
that the audio quality of the MP3 file is as good as that of the WAV
file.


An MP3 can *never* have as good quality as its source WAV file.

That said 192kHz can be pretty much 'as good' for most people on average
playback systems.

Surely you are still over-thinking this. S

(1) I have used the parameters for the source WAV file when creating
the MP3 file. Is this a sensible approach? Audio quality is top
priority.


Yes.


(2) Please tell me if the audio in the MP3 file is as clear as with
the WAV. I think it is, but I would like to be re-assured.


Probably not quite the same, but nothing glaringly different. Most people
wouldn't know or care.

The words on the recording are, "people like that should be .... I
know, they should be homeless".

Thank you for responses.


Given the quality of the source material, does it matter ? Or is the
objective to enable people to have the best shot at picking out the words.

Also if the WAV is 83KB and the resultant MP3 93KB, what is the point of
making it an MP3 in the first place - player compatibility maybe ?

geoff



  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro,uk.rec.audio
Brian Gaff \(Sofa 2\) Brian Gaff \(Sofa 2\) is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default LAME conversion to MP3

You will not ever get the same quality from any lossy compression as you do
from a wav or flac compressed file, alac on Apple, but the lower the bitrate
etc the worse it will get of course. Some of the variable bit rate mp3s do a
good job especially at level 3 very 44.1khz and 256kbits/sec max or greater.
Brian

--
----- --
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
wrote in message
...
This message follows on from a previous message to this forum. I need
confirmation that I have used the right parameters saving to MP3, and
that the audio quality of the MP3 file is as good as that of the WAV
file.

This message pertains to;
http://c-compiler.com/myfiles/a-mp3.zip

The original WAV is at; x.wav

I have converted this file to MP3. Please listen to; x.mp3

According to Windows Media Player, the bit rate of the source file is
192 Kbps, see "windows-media-player.jpg"

According to VLC, the source file has sample rate 48,000 Hz and bits
per sample 16. This particular codec (IMA WAV ADPCM Audio) actually
has 4 bits per sample, but this is decompressed to 16 bits per sample.
See "vlc.jpg".

According to MediaInfo, the source file has sample rate 48,000 Hz and
bit rate 192 kb/s, with a bit depth of 4 bits (which is decompressed
to 16 bits, as noted above), see "mediainfo.jpg".

According to Total Recorder, the source file has sample rate 48,000 Hz
and bit depth 4 bits, see "totalrecorder.jpg".

I use the LAME encoder with Total Recorder to convert the WAV to MP3,
see "totalrecorderA.jpg".

The media format in Total Recorder specifies sample rate 48,000 Hz and
bit rate 192. This is in keeping with the parameters for the source
WAV file, see "totalrecorderB.jpg".

Finally, opening the new MP3 file (converted from WAV) gives the
screen shown in "totalrecorderC.jpg". Bit rate for the MP3 is 192
kbit/s and sample rate is 48,000 Hz.


There are essentially two questions I need to ask.

(1) I have used the parameters for the source WAV file when creating
the MP3 file. Is this a sensible approach? Audio quality is top
priority.

(2) Please tell me if the audio in the MP3 file is as clear as with
the WAV. I think it is, but I would like to be re-assured.

The words on the recording are, "people like that should be .... I
know, they should be homeless".

Thank you for responses.



  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro,uk.rec.audio
[email protected] invalid@invalid.invalid is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24
Default LAME conversion to MP3

On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 08:05:25 -0000, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa 2\)"
wrote:

You will not ever get the same quality from any lossy compression as you do
from a wav or flac compressed file, alac on Apple, but the lower the bitrate
etc the worse it will get of course. Some of the variable bit rate mp3s do a
good job especially at level 3 very 44.1khz and 256kbits/sec max or greater.
Brian


I've used the source WAV parameters; sample rate 48,000 Hz and bit
rate 192 kb/s; when converting to the MP3. I don't know if this is
proper for the destination MP3 file.

Advice? Thank you.

What I really want to know is whether the two files sound similar. I
think they do. Again, thanks for advice.


  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro,uk.rec.audio
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default LAME conversion to MP3

If I were you I'd try to do some processing to improve intelligibility rather
than worrying about fidelity. High pass everything below 200 Hz or so,
then low-pass everything above maybe 6KHz, and consider sticking a presence
boost in there. You might then consider an expander and fiddling with the
threshold on the expander to try and boost the voice out of the noise.

I think you are worried about entirely the wrong thing here.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro,uk.rec.audio
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default LAME conversion to MP3

wrote:
On 21 Feb 2020 12:30:08 -0500, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

If I were you I'd try to do some processing to improve intelligibility rather
than worrying about fidelity. High pass everything below 200 Hz or so,
then low-pass everything above maybe 6KHz, and consider sticking a presence
boost in there. You might then consider an expander and fiddling with the
threshold on the expander to try and boost the voice out of the noise.

I think you are worried about entirely the wrong thing here.


The actions on the source WAV file must be such as to maintain
authenticity. If I start changing and deleting parts of the audio
file, that would render the output file as different from the source
file, and make it untrustworthy.


I don't know about UK law, but as soon as you have made a transfer to
MP3, or even a transfer to flat PCM, your file is no longer admissible in
court. Rules of evidence in the UK are likely different but you can hire
any one of a number of excellent forensic audio people there who can create
an audition file which is separate from the traceable reference file (which
is what is normally done for courtroom proceedings in the US).

Sorry to bug you, but; I've used the source WAV parameters; sample
rate 48,000 Hz and bit rate 192 kb/s; when converting to the MP3. I
don't know if this is proper for the destination MP3 file. What is
your view?


My view is that you are looking at totally the wrong thing, but since you
refuse to explain why you want to do any of this, it's hard to know.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #14   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro,uk.rec.audio
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,812
Default LAME conversion to MP3

On 22/02/2020 6:30 am, Scott Dorsey wrote:
If I were you I'd try to do some processing to improve intelligibility rather
than worrying about fidelity. High pass everything below 200 Hz or so,
then low-pass everything above maybe 6KHz, and consider sticking a presence
boost in there. You might then consider an expander and fiddling with the
threshold on the expander to try and boost the voice out of the noise.

I think you are worried about entirely the wrong thing here.
--scott


Yeah, the source media content is the only thing getting in the way of
intelligibility. Unfortunately most of the extraneous clutter is not too
far removed from the vocal frequencies.

Looks like more of a job for Spectral Layers, or a Mac or Linux
equivalent, to edit out the unwanted noises. Arduous fiddly work, but if
the content is really that important ....

geoff
  #15   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro,uk.rec.audio
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default LAME conversion to MP3

On 22/02/2020 4:30 am, Scott Dorsey wrote:
If I were you I'd try to do some processing to improve intelligibility rather
than worrying about fidelity. High pass everything below 200 Hz or so,
then low-pass everything above maybe 6KHz, and consider sticking a presence
boost in there. You might then consider an expander and fiddling with the
threshold on the expander to try and boost the voice out of the noise.

I think you are worried about entirely the wrong thing here.
--scott


Yes he seems to keep ignoring the fact the recording is lousy in the
first place and therefore worrying so much about MP3 settings is rather
pointless.


  #16   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected] jacyscott@suddenlink.net is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default LAME conversion to MP3

On Wednesday, February 19, 2020 at 3:48:45 PM UTC-6, wrote:
(2) Please tell me if the audio in the MP3 file is as clear as with
the WAV. I think it is, but I would like to be re-assured.


To the human ear, the MP3 sounds every bit as clear as the WAV file. I seriously doubt anyone would be able to reliably distinguish between the two.
  #18   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected] thekmanrocks@gmail.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,742
Default LAME conversion to MP3

Mike Rivers wrote:

It needs better mic placement


Any mic placement is better than what aounds like banging around
in someone's pants pocket, or inside a book bag!
  #20   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected] thekmanrocks@gmail.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,742
Default LAME conversion to MP3

John Williamson:

But this sounds like recorded evidence of something. To be used
in a legal matter.

Although, the pocket DAT audio recorded by a patron inside that
RI nightclub seventeen years ago was much clearer - perhaps too
clear, if you know what I mean. The tape - and DAT deck with
scorched exterior - were found in its deceased owners closet several
years later, was transferred by forensics to a functioning cassette,
and was used at the victim settlement trials. Very little of it was made
public.


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
another lame claim Herbert Hoover[_3_] Audio Opinions 1 February 9th 09 08:55 PM
another lame claim Herbert Hoover[_3_] Audio Opinions 0 February 9th 09 04:42 PM
Any LAME experts here? Lorin David Schultz Pro Audio 8 August 14th 06 10:48 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:15 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"