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: Stupid newbie mistakes. (Read 57113 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #125 –
I have started back in 1999 with some version of MusicMatch. I remember that i have encoded about 50-60 cds in mp3 128  and after i have finished i realized that they were encoded in mono  . So...back to work (Pentium I @ 200mhz)
Then i have discovered Xing and AudioCatalyst. Wooowww, the speed was amazing. So i was encoding everything @ VBR highest with an average around 210-220 kbs.
In 2001 i have read something on the internet about an amazing Lame 
I have searched and i found the command line of Lame. A friend of mine offered to make me a program with some presets so i don't have to write presets all over again. I have used that program for about...2 days, and then i have discovered CDex.
That was the mp3 time. Then i have discovered MPC (found about HA too)and use it for some time.
Now i am using Lame 3.97 (for car & friends who don't want to hear about nothing but mp3s) and...i am waiting for Sebastian's test to decide what format should i choose.
'Till then i am saving everything in .wavs
That was me 

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #127 –
I know Sebastian, but since space is not a problem those days...and i am a little busy to encode in anything...  so i decided to ...wait.
Until a few weeks i have encoded in Nero Mp4 "trancoding" but since the latest test...i have decided to wait a few days and then i have to decide if i choose OGG over AAC.
Maybe i am crazy, but this is me
 

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #128 –
By the way, i THINK that @ around 320 kbs the difference between codecs is not that big. Am i right?

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #129 –
Quote
By the way, i THINK that @ around 320 kbs the difference between codecs is not that big. Am i right?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=349238"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Actually, some people claim to abx mp3 at 320.  And lossy codecs always have limitations versus their lossless counterparts.

Your best bet is to go with flac or wavepack.

Try wavpack hybrid, perhaps.
Or OGG q9

Something like that.

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #130 –
Quote
Quote
By the way, i THINK that @ around 320 kbs the difference between codecs is not that big. Am i right?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=349238"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Actually, some people claim to abx mp3 at 320.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=349241"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


But I think only with killer samples.

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #131 –
Do you want a good one, guys???

Mistake (this one is from around..  2000, maybe 1999) :

Thinking that the last bar from the Winamp equalizer (16Khz one) was broken, because when playing 128kbps mp3's (the majority of the ones i had at that time) i couldn't hear any difference when tweaking it.

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #132 –
Ok...this is how I started out...

At first I tried to rip cds by copying the *.cda file from the audio cd to my computer. 

Then I found a program that ripped cds to mp3 (I don't even remember the name of the program), but ripped only 75% of the track for free (You had to pay if you wanted complete ripping capabilities. However, I didn't know that at the time. The result was me burning 2 or 3 cds from these mp3s and then wondering why all the tracks sounded so short... 

Then I ripped using Windows Media Player and WMA (Yes, horrifying, isn't it...), and hunted around the Internet for a program that would convert WMA's to MP3's, but I couldn't find one for an age... 

Then I stumbled on dbPoweramp, and thought that its 'CD' mp3 preset using LAME at 192kbps CBR was really CD quality (not like I could tell the difference back then anyway...) 

And finally, I uninstalled foobar2000 after using it the first time waaaaaay back in the day - because I thought it was too simple in looks and confusing in features. 

LOL

nazgulord

P.S. - I'm still learning these days...

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #133 –
I used audiograbber burst with Xing at 256 at first then switched to Lame 3.85. In all honesty the files I could not re-rip don't sound that bad.But the burst thing was an error.

I used r3mix for awhile. Who knew, right?

My more enduring mistake was not to tag anything up until Lame 3.89 came out. I had to go back and re-do all the tags which took time.

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #134 –
Well, I'm not sure if I made any serious mistakes - I was always very aware of the quality aspect. Made test CDs with multiple encodes at different quality levels, etc. Always knew that transcoding was bad, re-ripping was good... but anyway, here's my ripping history:

~1999    Used CDex to rip CDs to 128 CBR MP3s, because I somehow thought it was "cleaner" to use CBR than VBR... Lol. (I have always been very systematic when it comes to this kind of stuff.) I guess I just  couldn't quite grasp the benefits of VBR...

~2000    Had a short WMA period - re-ripped what I could to 96 kbps WMA, and transcoded any songs I had encoded from borrowed CDs.

~2001    Back to MP3 again. This time around I went for VBR, but not "true" VBR. I set an upper kbps limit at 128.

~2004    After having been a Mozilla/Firefox nerd for quite some time, I had a look at Ogg Vorbis. (Both open-source stuff.) I remember hearing way back what must have been nothing but a rumour: that ogg hid the original data somewhere on the HD, and saved and presented a small file to the user... Don't know where that came from. Anyway, I did a few quick tests and realized it kicks @§§ compared to both MP3 and WMA. Basically couldn't tell Q3 from originals (no true ABX tests though), so I settled for Q4 (~128 kbps) to have a little margin.

~2005    Discovered HA.org. Have realized that my decision to go for Ogg at Q4 probably wasn't such a bad one...  Still have only found one sample that I can ABX at this quality level:

Conjure One - Sleep (wavpack, 3.34MB)
Conjure One - Slepp (ogg Vorbis Q4, 543kB)

Am now taking part in the 128 kbps listening test with great interest, and enjoy doing the occasional ABXing on my own.
davidnaylor.org

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #135 –
Thinking the 128Kbps of gnutella was good quality. Then I found --alt-preset standard. Audio Bliss
And if you believe theres not a chance to die...

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #136 –
Stringing together plugins in wiamp to do all sort of crazy stuff to "spatialize" music to sound homogenous throughout the room.  I don't know if this was noobness, or my need to have music sound that same wherever I as at in a party. (audiphilia extremus?)

I also thought that EQ sliders could make anything sound good.  I guess I should have looked into a career at Sony music if that were the case.

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #137 –
1998:

I was still a newbie at computers, lol. My first computer was a Compaq, AMD-K62 333mhz (sigh) 48mb RAM.
I used to rip music from my cds using xing encoder lol. I then realised that this was a shitty codec a few years later. Oh yeah, and I had a crappy external USB iomega cd-rw lmao.

2002- 2006:
New pc, a Sony VAIO RX305, Pentium 4 2ghz 1gb RAM etc...I used audiograbber + lame encoder @ 192kbps - 320kbps. Space wasn't really an issue and on my ipod, most of my songs are 192kbps.

2006:
Built my own pc, a pentium dual core 3ghz (overclocked to 4ghz) with a 300gb SATA II HD etc... One fast machine...I use lame encoder.

As you can see, I didn't really make any serious mistakes...

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #139 –
I first started ripping CDs to WAV using CD-TOOLS, which was a MS-DOS based program included on the CD-ROM magazine PC Format (I guess, some UK magazine anyway...).  CD-TOOLS was actually more than a ripping program, it could do all sorts of things. Even list the TOC and technical data.
I did this on a 486 DX2 computer me and my dad build from components we got from a computer parts supplier for cheap.
The soundcard was an ESS type card and sounded pretty good (at the time).
In order to compress the PCM WAV files I used Bladeenc, l3enc (pirated of course, Fraunhofer stuff was very expensive at the time and still is with it's damn royalties) and also experimented with Xing suite all on Windows. Even though Fraunhofer had playback software for Windows 3.1 I didn't play MP3 content until I got Windows 95 on my computer. The only MPEG audio I played on Windows 3.1 was MPEG-1 Layer 2.

The only real mistake must have been using the Astrid Quartex AAC codec which was a fake. Even though PsyTEL AAC was actually using the original draft specs for the Advanced Audio Codec I didn't try AAC again until Nero released it's own implementation of the AAC codec under the name NeroDigital which I claim is the BEST implementation ever. Those german peeps really know their codecs (heh, MP3 is also german you know with patents owned by Fraunhofer IIS and Thomson Multimedia).

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #142 –
Quote from: dv1989 on
Quote from: JensRex on

Quote from: smsmasters on
As you can see, I didn't really make any serious mistakes...

Except you just resurrected 9 months old dead topic. Congratulations newbie.

What would you rather have him do: create a new topic for the same purpose, so that you or someone else could tell him that "we already have a topic for this"?


Exactly, I detest those who are quick to prejudge someone as a "newbie".

Thank you.

Have a nice day.

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #143 –
Quote from: dv1989 on
Quote from: JensRex on
Quote from: smsmasters on
As you can see, I didn't really make any serious mistakes...
Except you just resurrected 9 months old dead topic. Congratulations newbie.
What would you rather have him do: create a new topic for the same purpose, so that you or someone else could tell him that "we already have a topic for this"?
Ahhh... the great bulletin board dilemma...

Find an old thread that suits what you want to say, someone reprimands you for resurrecting an old thread -- you're a n00b.

Decide that a thread is too old, start a new thread, someone reprimands you "here's a topic about that" -- you're a n00b.

Do not post something, only to blurt it out later, someone reprimands you "that is off topic" -- you're a n00b.

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #144 –
Quote from: saivert on
The only real mistake must have been using the Astrid Quartex AAC codec which was a fake. Even though PsyTEL AAC was actually using the original draft specs for the Advanced Audio Codec I didn't try AAC again until Nero released it's own implementation of the AAC codec under the name NeroDigital which I claim is the BEST implementation ever. Those german peeps really know their codecs (heh, MP3 is also german you know with patents owned by Fraunhofer IIS and Thomson Multimedia).

I'm not really sure what "BEST" means, but iTunes or CT might beg to differ. Oh, and the people responsible for AAC at Nero, are not really german.

Stupid newbie mistakes.

Reply #145 –
Quote
9 months old dead topic.


different point of view,not a criticism...

no n00b:
means that he search,read lots and post in the relevant thread because is interested.

n00b:
just start a new post without read anything.

n00b and no n00b,who really is?
n00b is one state of mind and not the number of posts.
the new user can have few posts here but lots there.

Q:
why this thread is not closed or deleted?
A:
because is one cool thread full of informations.

Q:
we can't  resurrect one old thread?
A:
if you're in topic...why not?

comments:
smsmasters have more answers here where lots are off topic than starting a new one.
in the end...the off topic answers resurrect this thread. 

TYA for resurrect this thread.