-r3mix

[billysardar]

Does anyone else use the -r3mix switch when encoding with LAME? I haven't seen anyone else talking about it.

 

[clintb]

In a word, no. R3mix has been bypassed for what must be a couple of years now. Use the --alt presets if you want much better quality. In particular, use "--alt-preset standard" for something much better in quality, but with only slightly larger filesizes. You can also use "--alt-preset standard -Z" for a bit better handling of some hard to encode songs.

I have a 30GB iPod and I just finished encoding my entire collection with -aps (--alt-preset standard).

Enlighten Yourself

 

[lowmagnet]

I used to do so, but now I use AAC. LameBrain is great for high-quality CD ripping/encoding under OS X.

 

[billysardar]

I use windows with EAC and RazorLame.

So what AAC quality do you use that gives the same results as r3mix?

 

[Doc Holiday]

In a word, no. R3mix has been bypassed for what must be a couple of years now. Use the --alt presets if you want much better quality. In particular, use "--alt-preset standard" for something much better in quality, but with only slightly larger filesizes. You can also use "--alt-preset standard -Z" for a bit better handling of some hard to encode songs.

I have a 30GB iPod and I just finished encoding my entire collection with -aps (--alt-preset standard).

Enlighten Yourself

I have to agree with you on the --aps -Z. That setting sounds great. I am in the process of ripping and encoding about 400 CD's using that setting. Also everybody should check hydrogenaudio it's a great site. Nice job linking to it clintb.

 

[billysardar]

D*mn. I'm just about to get an Ipod and I have encoded about 20 albums with -r3mix, about half of which were borrowed from mates. It the -aps that much better? I don't think it's worth doing them all again so I think I'll just use -aps from now on.

 

[clintb]

D*mn. I'm just about to get an Ipod and I have encoded about 20 albums with -r3mix, about half of which were borrowed from mates. It the -aps that much better? I don't think it's worth doing them all again so I think I'll just use -aps from now on.

I don't have *golden* ears, but from everything I've read on Hydrogenaudio, -aps is supposedly much better than --r3mix. I've been following the HA forums since their inception, but I leave the technical details to them and benefit from their knowledge. Translation = More time for me to listen. I'd say to re-encode.

Here's what I did:
Rip with EAC to .wav
Encode with Monkey's Audio on "Extra High" setting
Transcode with Multi-Frontend or Monkey's Audio for portable use.

By going with Monkey's Audio, or any lossless format, I'll never have to re-rip, but rather just transcode to the lossy "flavor of the day". And by transcoding from Monkey's, I'll never incur the "double loss" from one lossy format to another.

 

[billysardar]

That's a good idea for the future, but I haven't got the time or the inclination to re-encode all my already-done tracks.

 

[clintb]

It's your choice, but for only 20 albums/cd's, I'd do it. It's worth it.

 

[billysardar]

One of the main reasons why I'm not going to is because about half of the albums have scratched in them and I have spent quite a lot of time removing the little pops.
I think that after I start encoding with --alt-preset, if I notice a difference in quality between them and the -r3mix tracks, I'll possibly do it.
Also, I am going to be using AAC when it becomes widely available for windows (I may even be going over to mac in the next 6 months) so I'll leave it until then.

 

[billysardar]

Another thing, the switch -aps does not work with my version of LAME (3.93).

 

[Doc Holiday]

The switch is --alt-preset standard -Z not --APS, that's just the short hand version. Also I would be using version 3.90 of LAME. It's better then 3.93.

 

[billysardar]

Really? That's interesting. In what way is it better? Encoding quality or features?

 

[clintb]

Really? That's interesting. In what way is it better? Encoding quality or features?

Basically, a bunch of guys that have way better hearing than I and most people out there did extensive listening tests. From those tests came code level changes that you cannot do on the command line. "Code level", meaning within LAME before it's compiled. The results were the "--alt preset" profiles.

This started at least a couple of years ago at the r3mix site with some of the more technically advanced guys questioning Roel (the "owner" of r3mix) as to whether the quality and size was really all that good. Many heated discussions later you have Hydrogen Audio. Sometimes, to a newbie, HA can seem daunting and even elitist, but it's THE place to find out what's good or not. Rumors and inuendo are dispelled there. ABX listening tests are the order of the day and if you don't have the proof of an ABX test, you're wasting your breath. If you think you can hear it, prove it with ABX'ing.

So, back to your question of, "In what way is it better?". I can't tell you the technical details, but can say that many, many hours were spent by many people all in a collaborative effort to attain the best quality/filesize compromise possible. There you have the "--alt-preset" profiles.

 

[billysardar]

Woah! Thanks for the in-depth reply.

 

[Doc Holiday]

Woah! Thanks for the in-depth reply.

I couldn't have said it any better myself

 

[billysardar]

Clintb:

Which ABX software do you use? I have WinABX but to use this both files have to be in the wav format. Do you know any software that will ABX with mp3's?

 

[clintb]

That's the way ABX programs work. You're putting them on a level playing field by decoding to .wav. It effectively cuts out any possibility of adding or subtracting anything during the playback/decode.

There is another program that could be found on HA by searching for "ABC/HR" or "ABX/HR". I can't remember the exact name of it, but I'm pretty sure it ends with "/HR". I believe the user "ff123" is the creator or may have a link to it.

 

[billysardar]

OK thanks.
I'll stick with WinABX

 

[Doc Holiday]

I don't know what ABX sofware is, but I think it has to do with volume of your MP3's. If I am correct then MP3Gain is the program of choice for you. Check out HA if you want more info. It's fast, lossless, and stable.

--Edit: I did a search for ABX and found out what it was. Boy was I wrong. That's what I get for posting before searching.