How to convert WAV to MP3 at CD Quality.....

[TheRealWaldo]

Read your own post and tell me why you're wrong.

If you're into really loud and busy music, like some metal collections, your album averages could be around 200kbit/s. If you're into classical music, your album average may be 160kbit/s. To learn more why this size difference, read here.

Why would there be size difference if the type of music doesn't effect the encode?

Other quotes directly from the same site you are quoting:

. I am aware these do not represent the music you will be encoding, and therefore they are only used in the restricted, correct way:

and

no quantitative comparison, such as, for example, measuring and quantisizing the amount of deviation from the test signal at certain frequencies. Such deviation will differ with every different piece of music you encode, so there is no use for such tests.

Just so you know, I've written a few audio codecs in my time. Lossless DOES mean a loss of DATA, which, in music, is a difference in the WAVEFORM, which DOES, even if you think you CANNOT HEAR IT, affect the SOUND QUALITY.

There is no alternative but to LEARN exactly what an MP3 encoder does, as apposed to reading other peoples 'recomendations' and adjusting your settings appropriately. Reading somebodies comment on the spectral difference between an encoded and the original sound means absolutely nothing unless you KNOW what the data means. And in every single test case they have, I see an audible difference!

Otherwise you will have alot of be-wildered people (as above) stating that it didn't work for them, and it sounds awful, and they'll blame it on the product (Or site in this case) you are trying to promote!

If you're going to make a huge claim, and speak of it publicly, you better be prepared to back it up, or be called a fibber.

Nothing against ya Nick, but don't try to 'wow' people with untruths.

W.

 

[NickHall]

Lol....Waldo, no offence taken to anything you've said.

I wasn't trying to promote the site, and as i've said a couple of times now, all I was trying to do was help people get better quality mp3's....damn ive downloaded some off this site that sound really bad 'because' of the encoding, and not the mixing....

I'll try one more time to explain what I mean.

If I encode one of my WAVS to MP3, and I cant hear the difference, and noone I play it too can tell the difference, then as far as I'm concerned it hasn't lost any 'musical quality' because the music is still there as far as the listener is concerned.

I dont deny it has technically lost quality. Im just saying it sounds as good as the original.

True, the different types of music will be more / less demanding on the bit rate. But the point is, LAME works this out for you and applies the relevant bit rate where its neded. So the settings r3mix suggest 'will' work for any music, as they only set 'how' the codec manages the data, and not the exact bit rate. The codec works this out for itself.

The settings I described have, to my knowledge worked for every single mp3 I have encoded, and as I explained somewhere else, I have my entire CD collection on MP3 playing in the car (6 disc autochanger, 6 albums per cd....) I can play the original back to back with the mp3, and you cant tell the difference.... Metal to Jazz, Classical to Eminem. The encoding settings work every time.

Anyway, as I said im bored of having this debate... I really dont care, all I know is that 'I' end up with mp3's that sound as good as the original CD, using LAME. and I therefore thought I would try and help everyone else do the same.

Wasn't trying to wow them, just get to hear their music at the quality / size it deserves.

Peace. (and please stop now...lol....im only here to make music!....)