Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Encoding or decoding: which is most important? (Read 3211 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Encoding or decoding: which is most important?

Hi all.
I'm new to this forum and I'm also new to Lame. Until now I have only encoded music for casual PC listening. I have been using AudioCatalys for this.

I really like good quality music and I want it in my HiFi at home (not in the PC). I'm going to try the following for this:
- EAC
- Lame encoder  (probably with RazorLame)
- Netgear MP101GE (MP3 player with TP and signal out)

If this gives good quality I'll be really happy. This way I can store all my music on my server and play it on my HiFi.


But since I'm quite new to this I have some questions:

Does MP3 perform enough for HiFi? Anywhere I can read more about this?

Is it encoding or decoding that is most important to do really well? The encoding is well taken care of with Lame I have understood (but haven't tried yet). But decoding is done by Netgear with probably cheapo-technique. Do you think that this machine will do any good with my NAD reciever and my Tannoy speakers?

Does anyone know of any other brand machines for connection with network and reciever?


Note, I'm no audiophile (i.e. I don't have as good ears as one). But I do like crisp and detailed sound.

Thanks,
Michael

Encoding or decoding: which is most important?

Reply #1 –
take a look at the FAQ's. You may want to use --alt preset standard - I think this setting would be perfect for you. Also, you don't need Razor-Lame or something. Just use EAC with LAME and you'll be fine. In the FAQ LAME 3.90.3 is recommended - but many people prefer LAME 3.96 instead, since LAME 3.90.3 is pretty old (for software). 3.96 is also a lot faster and produces at least for 90% of my files much lower bitrates. You could try both and if you don't hear a difference (which you probably won't anyway), choose LAME 3.96, because of the advantages mentioned above (I use LAME 3.96 as well =)).
--alt-presets are there for a reason! These other switches DO NOT work better than it, trust me on this.
LAME + Joint Stereo doesn't destroy 'Stereo'

Encoding or decoding: which is most important?

Reply #2 –
Thanks Jojo.
The standard preset was what I had in mind. So I don't need RazorLame? Why does it exist?

What would you concider the weakest link in the chain regarding quality of sound?
1. Encoding (Will use Lame with preset "standard")
2. Decoding (Netgear hardware?)
3. Pre amplifier (Netware hardware?)
4. Amplifier  (I have a good one)
5. Speakers (I have good speakers)

/Michael

Encoding or decoding: which is most important?

Reply #3 –
The MP3 standard defines the layout of the encoded data structures (bit stream) and how to decode them. Therefore, there is only one correct way to decode an MP3 stream. MP3 decoders don't make any difference regarding audio quality, unless they are broken and decode incorrectly, of course.

As you have already noticed, the encoding part is important for audio quality. In this forum you will find lots of infos about that. A good starting point is the FAQ page.


And your question "Does MP3 perform enough for HiFi? Anywhere I can read more about this?"
The standard reply can only be: try it yourself.
When you ask people you will get many different personal opinions, from "MP3 is the best" to "digital audio is all bad, vinyl is the only way".

Encoding or decoding: which is most important?

Reply #4 –
Thanks smack.
This is good news. I was afraid that the decoding could be *bad* in the Netgear machine.

I'll try it out tomorrow when I get it.

/Michael

Encoding or decoding: which is most important?

Reply #5 –
If the hardware you are planning to use for decoding is cheap, then you will probably get some audio quality degradation because of low-quality analog part (unless it has digital output).

Encoding or decoding: which is most important?

Reply #6 –
Quote
Does anyone know of any other brand machines for connection with network and reciever?

There's a gazillion of them these days but my favorite for audio is still the Squeezebox.