[X4U] MP3 in iTunes vs. LAME (Was: Most advanced Video Codec WMV?)

[B. Kuestner]

>> You can tell iTunes to encode MP3 and invest more or less effort  
>> in the task. So setting it to 128 kb/s VBR will give you different  
>> results if you tell iTunes to be quick about it or analyze the  
>> audio material much longer to get the best result. But even then  
>> the LAME encoder still does better at the same bitrate than  
>> iTunes' built-in encoder as far as MP3 is concerned, even if you  
>> put iTunes to the highest encoding effort/quality.
>
> I'm not doubting you, but curious. What are your grounds for this  
> statement? Have you done a blind listening-test of LAME v iTunes  
> encoding yourself, or is this widely documented on the web? Or is  
> it simply that posters to the LAME mailing list regularly make the  
> same assertion?

Hi Stroller. No, I am not on the LAME mailing list. And I don't use  
the LAME codec myself. I prefer to use AAC, because my music eco- 
system is all Apple. Well, it was: I now have a car stereo that  
supports MP3-CDs but not AAC. So I am beginning to somewhat regret my  
decision to use AAC.

My strongest case for the above statement is a test I remember in  
German c't-magazine. It was a true "blind" test in that the listeners  
did not know which codec they were listening to nor the bitrates.

> Whilst I was aware that in theory different encoders could produce  
> different qualities of audio I guess I'd somewhat expect it to  
> apply more to image or movie compression. Now you have me all  
> paranoid that I shouldn't be ripping my songs in iTunes, even  
> though I'm unlikely to be able to hear the difference myself!

Well, putting the paranoia-factor aside, I myself am not that picky  
about the compression settings. And if it has never bothered you  
before, it should not now. From my own listening experience I find  
the biggest sound factors in the original CD quality and the  
downstream chain, the MP3/AAC player and the amp/speakers or  
headphones respectively. Environment noise also comes in much higher  
than the losses through MP3 or AAC compression. If I really want to  
max out the listening experience, I put in the original CD anyway.  
But still, since I got my nice-nice stereo I am quite disappointed  
with the job of many recording studios. Some recordings (e. g. Pink  
Floyd and Dire Straits) sound just amazing. But others sound just as  
flat and well, exhausted, as they did on the old stereo.

Compared to the impact of the speakers/headphones, the amp, the  
studio recording the player and the cables used, the codec impact is  
in my experience negligible once you cross a certain level (160 VBR  
for MP3 and 128 for AAC). It's there, probably, yes, but who cares  
when the wind or car noises obscure much, much more and the headphone  
is weak in the low frequencies. I got back to the position that I  
just want to enjoy my music and not spoil the enjoyment through nit- 
picking.

But if you really want to use LAME you don't have to miss out on the  
iTunes convenience.

<http://macupdate.com/info.php/id/8837>

Björn