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: Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR (Read 36953 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

I just finished downloading their new album (decided to pay £5) and went looking for the encoder. Turns out they used Lame 3.93 at 160 kbs, but in CBR mode.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #1 –
Compatibility or ignorance.

Yes, I know VBR is part of the MP3 spec.
daefeatures.co.uk

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #2 –
MP3 was originally CBR, some implementation still CBR/ABR. Other codecs are VBR from the ground up. Outside HA what is MP3 VBR ? or what is another codec ?

Blame frontends. With other formats frontends are pretty standardised , But with MP3 there is no one way to encode . Every frontend dev has his / her own idea. LAME has had tuned VBR 0~9 for years and I think its the best way to go. Average joe understands CBR bitrate and VBR quality scale. You have to explain to them WHY to use VBR over CBR and they have to agree its more efficient / higher quality. With other codecs its again no issue because VBR was standard from the start.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #3 –
Quote from: shadowking on
LAME has had tuned VBR 0~9 for years and I think its the best way to go. Average joe understands CBR bitrate and VBR quality scale. You have to explain to them WHY to use VBR over CBR and they have to agree its more efficient / higher quality. With other codecs its again no issue because VBR was standard from the start.
Well, with them having chosen LAME, I was surprised they didn't go for presets.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #4 –
If the encoder is 3.94 or more then they use presets even on cbr.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #6 –
Quote from: gorman on
I just finished downloading their new album (decided to pay £5) and went looking for the encoder. Turns out they used Lame 3.93 at 160 kbs, but in CBR mode.


Hopefully at least it was joint stereo, or was it?

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #7 –
Yes, it's joint stereo.
 

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #9 –
According to mp3gain, every track is clipping.  Average volume = 98.3.

(Of course, I haven't used a download service that doesn't sell mp3s that don't clip, but...)

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #10 –
Quote from: zipr on
According to mp3gain, every track is clipping.  Average volume = 98.3.

(Of course, I haven't used a download service that doesn't sell mp3s that don't clip, but...)

Um... you wanna double-check the number of negatives in that last sentence? 

    - M.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #11 –
Quote from: M on
Quote from: zipr on

According to mp3gain, every track is clipping.  Average volume = 98.3.

(Of course, I haven't used a download service that doesn't sell mp3s that don't clip, but...)

Um... you wanna double-check the number of negatives in that last sentence? 

    - M.


Hey, give me a break -- English is my first language. 

How about this: All of the download music stores that I've used provide mp3s that clip.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #12 –
Quote from: zipr on
How about this: All of the download music stores that I've used provide mp3s that clip.

Why do you care? Would you always replaygain your files BEFORE encoding them (lowering the SNR ratio)??? From my experience most mp3 decoders have no audible problem decoding the files that I've even amplified using MP3Gain... But, that's another topic
Can't wait for a HD-AAC encoder :P

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #13 –
Believe, the CDs are also clipping... MP3 is just a reflection of that... (lowering the volume or not).

I find Radiohead's strategy ackward, it looks like the attitude "hey we're good, we're making digital downloads for you and you pay only what you can afford, ok?". I don't think that attitute meets any quality standards with MP3/160/CBR and it lets me think that their main product focus and sweet spot is intended to be the DISCBOX for 80 USD - there is a bonus disc with that package - which reinforces the idea that the 160/CBR download is not their primary product. And that is what they want for the fans to grasp. I think the digital download is only *yet* another marketing strategy. And with each marketing strategy, there comes a lie - a sweet subtle lie that you know you took advantage of something but at the same time it leaves you with a bitter feeling you didn't get something "good" enough.

It will likely to fail because the P2P, Soulseek and other clients are already _INFESTED_ with the 160/CBR copy. They figured this would happen...

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #14 –
What's on peer-to-peer networks is irrelevant, they were giving the MP3s away for free anyway.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #15 –
Quote from: Bourne on
Believe, the CDs are also clipping... MP3 is just a reflection of that... (lowering the volume or not).

I find Radiohead's strategy ackward, it looks like the attitude "hey we're good, we're making digital downloads for you and you pay only what you can afford, ok?". I don't think that attitute meets any quality standards with MP3/160/CBR and it lets me think that their main product focus and sweet spot is intended to be the DISCBOX for 80 USD - there is a bonus disc with that package - which reinforces the idea that the 160/CBR download is not their primary product. And that is what they want for the fans to grasp. I think the digital download is only *yet* another marketing strategy. And with each marketing strategy, there comes a lie - a sweet subtle lie that you know you took advantage of something but at the same time it leaves you with a bitter feeling you didn't get something "good" enough.

It will likely to fail because the P2P, Soulseek and other clients are already _INFESTED_ with the 160/CBR copy. They figured this would happen...


The vast majority of people are happy with 128 CBR anything. So I think this idea that the fans will go "wait a minute, these 160 KPBS CBR MP3's are substandard! They want me to buy the $80 box!" is a little silly. The vast majority of people would understand one word out of the phrase "160 KPBS CBR MP3's." And that word is MP3.  And you know what? Good for them. I actually envy them a little bit. They can just enjoy music without worrying over what format its saved in.
I think something went wrong and now I own a blind camel.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #16 –
Let me put it simple:

What radiohead did, wasn't bad. It wasn't very good either. It was all in all just "fair".

The point however is, that without too much effort, they could have done an even better job, thus completely removing any "flaw". I asume creating the stage required quite a bit of effort - exceeding in the format and quality choice department wouldn't have been significantly more effort.

So, all in all - it was a fair deal and okay. They wasted a great chance of turning it into a "very good" deal. But failure to do that, doesn't make it bad.

- Lyx
I am arrogant and I can afford it because I deliver.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #17 –
Quote from: Bourne on
I think the digital download is only *yet* another marketing strategy. And with each marketing strategy, there comes a lie - a sweet subtle lie that you know you took advantage of something but at the same time it leaves you with a bitter feeling you didn't get something "good" enough.

What you got was a new Radiohead album for whatever price you're willing to pay. If you paid nothing, you got a free Radiohead album. That's a good thing, isn't it? If you paid $10, you bought a new Radiohead album for $10. If you want the fancy LP/CD package, you pay $80. If you don't, you don't pay $80 -- but you still have the album.

Quote from: Bourne on
It will likely to fail because the P2P, Soulseek and other clients are already _INFESTED_ with the 160/CBR copy. They figured this would happen...

Probably, but it doesn't actually matter. If you want to pay for the album, you go through them. If you don't, you can go through them, or download it off P2P/Usenet. The end result is the same: you pay nothing, and they make nothing. The only distinction is that they don't have a strong idea how many are paying nothing as individuals go through P2P/Usenet.

Marketing or no, you still have an album in your "hands", and it's about iTunes-ish quality. I see nothing worth complaining about here.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #18 –
Ignorance is bliss for most people as far as 160/CBR is concerned... but you go and ask to every member on this board if their favourite band did something like this... I don't care for Radiohead coz I never liked their music... but if it was one of my favourite bands, I would certainly be disappointed! And Lyx put it right, they just missed to turn this a very good deal - which is not.

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2007/10/radiohea...in_rainbow.html

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #19 –
Rolling Stone quotes Jonny Greenwood as saying about the bit rate:

"I don’t know, we talked about it and we just wanted to make it a bit better than iTunes, which it is, so that’s kind of good enough, really. It’s never going to be CD quality, because that’s what CD does."

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #20 –
People who hate Radiohead for this release either paid too much for it or listen for artifacts instead of listening to the music.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #21 –
Quote
"I don’t know, we talked about it and we just wanted to make it a bit better than iTunes, which it is, so that’s kind of good enough, really. It’s never going to be CD quality, because that’s what CD does."


Anyone will agree MP3/160/CBR is better than iTunes AAC/128/VBR ?
I mean... these guys know _nothing_ when it comes down to real world... and the answer that is not going to be CD quality is very ignorant. Lame/V2 is pretty much CD quality for 99.9% of music.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #22 –
160 CBR should be at least neck to neck with 128k AAC. There is too much bitrate difference - why should I believe that it is inferior ?

Having said that, sold CBR encoding is totaly retarded in 2007. Makes you wonder if all the constant development of mp3 and other codecs is for nothing.

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #23 –
CBR is less efficient than VBR. Agree?
AAC is a technically better codec than MP3. Agree?
They could have done this better and not in a lousy way...

Radiohead In Rainbows at 160CBR

Reply #24 –
Quote from: Bourne on
CBR is less efficient than VBR. Agree?
AAC is a technically better codec than MP3. Agree?
They could have done this better and not in a lousy way...


Yes - Although at high bitrate the quality advantage is probably nonexistant in most cases. MP3 VBR is not better than 256 k fixed / ABR, but it is more efficient.
Yes  - but there is a big difference between 128 and 160k. HA never had public 160 k tests.
Yes