Efficiency of Music Ripping Tools/Formats
- Shotokan101
- RouterTech Team
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:17 pm
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
I found the Download link for CDex to be dead. Here is a link to the Homepage http://sourceforge.net/projects/cdexosneilius wrote:Hi Jim,
I forgot to mention - a great CD ripper is CDex, available at http://kent.dl.sourceforge.net/sourcefo ... ex_151.exe. You can drop in a more up to date lame encoder (lame_enc.dll) from http://www.free-codecs.com/Lame_Encoder_download.htm if you like. I'm using 3.96.
Cheers,
Neil.
We learn something every day, and lots of times it’s that what we learned the day before was wrong.
—Bill Vaughan
—Bill Vaughan
- Shotokan101
- RouterTech Team
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:17 pm
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
- Shotokan101
- RouterTech Team
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:17 pm
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Righty-Ho !
Anyone know where I can find the two files linked to here :-
SPECIAL NOTE: There are now compiles of the above lame version which ONLY will encode properly with APS no matter what settings are passed to it. This requires little configuration and is a fool proof way to encode properly. No way you can go wrong with this. You can obtain them from here:
http://www.rarewares.org/files/mp3/lame ... .3_MOD.zip for the APS only lame.exe or
http://www.rarewares.org/files/mp3/lame ... .3_MOD.zip for the APS only lame.dll
REMINDER: PLEASE NOTE THE ABOVE 2 COMPILES ARE SPECIAL VERSIONS OF THE ORGINAL 3.90.3 MODIFIED
Seeing as the links seem broken and for some reason Google isn't finding alternates.....
Anyone know where I can find the two files linked to here :-
SPECIAL NOTE: There are now compiles of the above lame version which ONLY will encode properly with APS no matter what settings are passed to it. This requires little configuration and is a fool proof way to encode properly. No way you can go wrong with this. You can obtain them from here:
http://www.rarewares.org/files/mp3/lame ... .3_MOD.zip for the APS only lame.exe or
http://www.rarewares.org/files/mp3/lame ... .3_MOD.zip for the APS only lame.dll
REMINDER: PLEASE NOTE THE ABOVE 2 COMPILES ARE SPECIAL VERSIONS OF THE ORGINAL 3.90.3 MODIFIED
Seeing as the links seem broken and for some reason Google isn't finding alternates.....
Jim
.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....
.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....
- biro
- RouterTech Team
- Posts: 1274
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:03 pm
- Location: Letchworth Garden City, ENGLAND
- Contact:
Google came up with this http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jfe1205/LAME/
- Shotokan101
- RouterTech Team
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:17 pm
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
- Shotokan101
- RouterTech Team
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:17 pm
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
- Shotokan101
- RouterTech Team
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:17 pm
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
HI GUys - I'm now messing around with MPR encoding using LAME in VBR mode - has anyone out ther (?Nei?) and experiemce with this ?
I'm seeing REALLY slow (compared to CBR with my normal CReative Util) so I'm looking for some indication of whether VBR on a reasonable spec PC should be taking about twice as long as cbr ? (will try LAME in CBR later)
I'm seeing REALLY slow (compared to CBR with my normal CReative Util) so I'm looking for some indication of whether VBR on a reasonable spec PC should be taking about twice as long as cbr ? (will try LAME in CBR later)
Jim
.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....
.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....
Hey Jim,
I've only ever used LAME 3.69.1 to encode in CBR - 128kbps, q=0, joint stereo for my music/CD ripping on my PC and 64/32kbps, q=0, mono for podcasts I encode for streaming over the web. At q=0 (the highest quality setting), LAME takes ages to encode, 1.5 - 2x slower than real-time, but the results are pretty good, very close to the original audio/CD. I keep it at CBR mainly to ensure compatability with everything else (other platforms/players etc).
Rgds,
Neil.
I've only ever used LAME 3.69.1 to encode in CBR - 128kbps, q=0, joint stereo for my music/CD ripping on my PC and 64/32kbps, q=0, mono for podcasts I encode for streaming over the web. At q=0 (the highest quality setting), LAME takes ages to encode, 1.5 - 2x slower than real-time, but the results are pretty good, very close to the original audio/CD. I keep it at CBR mainly to ensure compatability with everything else (other platforms/players etc).
Rgds,
Neil.
- Shotokan101
- RouterTech Team
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:17 pm
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Hi Neil,
Thanks for the quick reply.
Just a bit surprised that it's manageing to max out my cpu (3200+ Athlon - 1GB Memory) but at least its only about half real time
Guess I'll play around a bit more - I'm trying out the MOD'ed Lame Encoder DLL fromn the HA link you posted as it seems to be recognised as the "best" size/quality copromise and you shouldn't need to mess around with the VBR settings/switches .....
Are there known compatibility problems with VBR then ? from what I've read VBR has always been part of tye MP3 spec. so all players should support it .......
Thanks for the quick reply.
Just a bit surprised that it's manageing to max out my cpu (3200+ Athlon - 1GB Memory) but at least its only about half real time
Guess I'll play around a bit more - I'm trying out the MOD'ed Lame Encoder DLL fromn the HA link you posted as it seems to be recognised as the "best" size/quality copromise and you shouldn't need to mess around with the VBR settings/switches .....
Are there known compatibility problems with VBR then ? from what I've read VBR has always been part of tye MP3 spec. so all players should support it .......
Jim
.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....
.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....
I seem to remember some media players having issues back in the day but I'm sure it's all cleared up now. I guess I'm just a die hard CBR person! The one thing I do like about CBR is that I can know the exact file size when I'm encoding. I did try the 3.97 beta but it sounded noticeably poorer in quality when using those CBR settings I use, and encoding time was much quicker so I think it wasn't doing as much work as it should have been. I went back to 3.96.1 anyway, but as is the case with all this stuff, whatever works for you is always best!
- Shotokan101
- RouterTech Team
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:17 pm
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Hio Neil,
I suppose at the end of the day it's YOUR ears that matter
...II'm quite ggetting in to this at the moment so I'll let you know how I get on - I've posted off to a couple of the ripper tools I'm testing to see about getting the MOD'ed LAME dlld's activated so I'll see how it goes - still not comvinced that LAME should be as slow on my pc
What spec. PC are you ripping on at CBR ? I can understand VBR being a bit slower as I expect the algorithy to be quite a lot more sophisticated.... but I can rip an 50 MIn. CD (NON-LAME Enc. I suspect) at 128kbs in under 5 Minutes givin pretty acceptable quality for "on the move" listening.
Big problem ough at the moment - as Im now getting quite critical o the listening test - my home headphones are now showing up as prettty poor - so more expense there I guess....
I suppose at the end of the day it's YOUR ears that matter
...II'm quite ggetting in to this at the moment so I'll let you know how I get on - I've posted off to a couple of the ripper tools I'm testing to see about getting the MOD'ed LAME dlld's activated so I'll see how it goes - still not comvinced that LAME should be as slow on my pc
What spec. PC are you ripping on at CBR ? I can understand VBR being a bit slower as I expect the algorithy to be quite a lot more sophisticated.... but I can rip an 50 MIn. CD (NON-LAME Enc. I suspect) at 128kbs in under 5 Minutes givin pretty acceptable quality for "on the move" listening.
Big problem ough at the moment - as Im now getting quite critical o the listening test - my home headphones are now showing up as prettty poor - so more expense there I guess....
Jim
.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....
.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....
Yeah the thing about trying to do accurate listening tests means you need accurate hardware, a sound card with accurate A/D and D/A converters, accurate, flat monitoring, if using speakers, a room with acoustics designed to be as neutral as possible etc etc - in short, a recording studio environment really. So many other things play a part in what you hear as well as the mp3 encoding itself. It's a whole minefield out there with a lot of bullshit running rife (in the hi-fi world especially) as well as good information. A subject for huge debate indeed!
My system is only an Athlon XP 1800+ but I'd imagine VBR encoding will take longer as more CPU time is needed to perform more analysis on the stream in order to decide which bitrate to encode a particular segment at etc.
My system is only an Athlon XP 1800+ but I'd imagine VBR encoding will take longer as more CPU time is needed to perform more analysis on the stream in order to decide which bitrate to encode a particular segment at etc.
- Shotokan101
- RouterTech Team
- Posts: 4779
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:17 pm
- Location: Glasgow, Scotland
I agree entirely - I stopped the Upgrading Hi-Fi spire some years ago for similar reasons and the "Logarithmic deterioration" IMO of the Value For Money ration (especially as mye ears keep getting older/poorer)
I'm a bit surprised that your Athlon XP 1800+ is as "apparently" slow as it seems - especially for CBR encoding .... what ripping app are you using ?
I'm a bit surprised that your Athlon XP 1800+ is as "apparently" slow as it seems - especially for CBR encoding .... what ripping app are you using ?
Jim
.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....
.....I'm Sorry But I Can't Do That Dave.....