Can you increase the quality of mp3's ?

[sean2002]

Say if I take a 128 mp3 file and decompress it to a .wav then encode it using lame 3.92 with the --alt-preset extreme switch, will the quality increase ?

 

[IamDavid]

no

 

[Gooberlx2]

no, you always lose quality when you re-encode.

decompressing to a wav doesn't magically get the bits back.

***Note: that's not meant to sound condescending, rather sarcastic.

 

[sean2002]

Thanks, I guess I'm stuck with 128k mp3's

 

[RudeBoie]

That ould be cool if it did, wouldn't it?
But then that would mean that all mp3's could sound CD quality, and the RIAA would really go crazy

 

[bob332]

what you need to do is look at mp3pro for the first encoding. if you re-encode you will not gain, but when you encode the first time, you will definately gain. mp3pro is awesome. take a look on google for mp3pro or go to mp3prozone.com and check it out. i have been encoding my cd collection in mp3pro @ 160kb/s and you can not tell the difference between that and a regular mp3 @ 320kb/s. check it out, definately worth a look.

 

[CubicZirconia]

<< Thanks, I guess I'm stuck with 128k mp3's >>



It's not like they really sound that bad.

 

[loserbutt]

no, use lame 3.91 and exact audio copy. I encoded mine at variable bitrate and they sound just like the original source cd's
http://www.r3mix.net/

 

[sean2002]

<< no, use lame 3.91 and exact audio copy. I encoded mine at variable bitrate and they sound just like the original source cd's >>



Thats how I make my own MP3's. EAC and lame 3.92 w/--alt-preset extreme switch. the 128 ones I have I downloaded from kazaa lite

 

[Nefrodite]

you can't convert your turd back into a cheeseburger no matter how hard you try.


lossy compression = throw sh*t out!! decompress lossy compression= stuff with stuff thrown out. recompress in lame 3.92 and you take stuff with stuff thrown out and try to throw more out


sad, but i bet many mp3s on file sharing are sorta like this


mp3 is not like zip, if it were that would be amazing. a compressed file you can play or decompress to full quality? would truely be insane.

 

[bob332]

you have to try mp3pro!!!!

 

[Nefrodite]

um hell no. its controlled by fraunghofer(sp). on current players it plays at half quality or something. i'd rather use lame and be able to use my mp3s anywhere.

 

[bob332]

if you are using winamp, get the free plugin or get a player at mp3prozone.com...pretty good stuff

 

[mk]

<< you have to try mp3pro!!!! >>


Stay away from MP3pro!!!!

There is no logical reason to use it at all. The format is (thankfully) quite rare and it's unlikely that the situation should ever change; everything you can do with it you can do better using some other format.
MP3pro was designed to provide very efficient compression (for portable use, streaming etc.) and is tuned for low bitrates i.e. 64-96 kbps only (above that it isn't tuned at all). At higher bitrates it loses to equal br mp3's in sound quality. It shouldn't be used for low br audio either as it gets beaten by wma and quite likely by ogg rc4 when it arrives.

You'll be better off sticking with MP3, if you can afford the space you should use LAME w/ --alt-preset standard or extreme.

Check out the list of recommended LAME settings and pick what suits you best.

 

[Workin']

I will also say stay away from mp3pro. It's optimized for low bitrates, as mk4 said. If you need low bitrates, use wma or ogg. If you don't need low bitrates, use LAME 3.9x and settings as previously described.

MP3PRO is NOT a "high quality" format. It's a "convenience" format.

 

[randypj]

OK.....I don't need no steenkin' low bitrates.
--Randy

 

[Nefrodite]

i can't remember the whole deal with mp3pro, but i think its something like only that one company can make an encoder.. no open source or specs i guess no lame encoder no point supporting a company like that.

 

[bob332]

personally i love mp3pro. i encode @ 160kb/s and cant tell a difference between that and a regular mp3 @ 256 or 320 k/bs. i will say that mp3pro @ 80k/bs is very impressive sounding much like 160 or 192 kb/s regular mp3. seems like i am the only one who likes mp3pro, but that is okay, it still kicks a$$...

 

[Nefrodite]

according to tests i've seen its no better then windows media at low bitrates, yes it does do well at low bitrates, but it doesn't scale very well. after 128kbs theres no point in using it.

 

[bob332]

have you heard it?

 

[Mucman]

<< you can't convert your turd back into a cheeseburger no matter how hard you try. >>



ROFL, that is definitely sig material