TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- CBR vs. VBR
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

CBR vs. VBR

Can anyone here hear the difference? (Let's say 320 CBR mp3 vs. 320 VBR mp3)

...
320 VBR?

3/10

Doubt it, but I can set up some ABX tests if anyone is really curious to test themselves.

quote:

Originally posted by netroM ... 320 VBR? 3/10

You know what I mean.

@MrJiveBoJingles
Would be really cool.

CBA?

quote:

Originally posted by Woonyxoxo You know what I mean.

:P
I don't think I can hear any difference between VBR and CBR tbh.

Would be fun to test though, so that would be nice of you JiveBoJingles

No. And I bet most of the people don't either.

quote:

Originally posted by Woonyxoxo @MrJiveBoJingles Would be really cool.

Okay. I'll have them ready within the next couple hours.

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Okay. I'll have them ready within the next couple hours.

Make some flacs too while your on it, a 16-bit flac and a 24-bit flac

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles Okay. I'll have them ready within the next couple hours.

I'll just use Total Commander to scan for the encoder used then Adobe Audio to see the frequency and deduce wether it's real or not.

quote:

Originally posted by dj christian Make some flacs too while your on it, a 16-bit flac and a 24-bit flac

I only have one album in 24 bit in the first place (CDs and Beatport WAVs are 16, after all), so for most of my music that would just be an upconversion from 16 bit, which would make no difference to the sound.

Someone else with a good amount of 24 bit music is welcome to try it, though...

Okay here is the test. 10 tracks, 3 sound files each, some different genres and different years. First file is CBR, second is VBR, third is the "X" that you need to identify:

(1) CBR | VBR | X

(2) CBR | VBR | X

(3) CBR | VBR | X

(4) CBR | VBR | X

(5) CBR | VBR | X

(6) CBR | VBR | X

(7) CBR | VBR | X

(8) CBR | VBR | X

(9) CBR | VBR | X

(10) CBR | VBR | X

Probability of getting all the unknowns correct by chance is 1 in 1024. Have at it.

quote:

Originally posted by Chimney I'll just use Total Commander to scan for the encoder used then Adobe Audio to see the frequency and deduce wether it's real or not.

Go ahead, I guess. Just don't give away the answers and spoil it for others.

The answer is no probably not,

I dunno, I trust CBR more, just seems weird having the quality level change arbitrarily.

quote:

Originally posted by Darkarbiter The answer is no probably not, I dunno, I trust CBR more, just seems weird having the quality level change arbitrarily.

That's what I thought too but I literally can't hear shit in the difference so I guess I can stop being anal about having everything CBR.

Well, it's not "arbitrary." VBR reduces or increases the rate depending on the level of audio information it needs to represent at the time, with the overall goal of lowering the ratio of space required to quality achieved. In other words, CBR may just be overkill a lot of the time, and VBR is based around that realization.

Unless in the mastering someone added a brickwall at 20hz and ~10khz there's always some sound that you'll lost, sometimes is annoying noise, sometimes adds some effect. With the vbr you can lost some of the deepness but it's almost unoticeable, if you compare the 2 sound waves can be noticeable the difference but in sound terms is nearly the same. Happens the same with the joint stereo/stereo.

quote:

Originally posted by Woonyxoxo That's what I thought too but I literally can't hear shit in the difference so I guess I can stop being anal about having everything CBR.

VBR is generally superior when you are dealing with stuff that is 192kbps or below

the only problem I have with VBR is that it occasionally won't be properly recognised by some players/applications, and they become all confused about the playing time...

quote:

Originally posted by noikeee the only problem I have with VBR is that it occasionally won't be properly recognised by some players/applications, and they become all confused about the playing time...

+1

niche peculiarties that noone cares about

more at 11

quote:

Originally posted by Chimney I'll just use Total Commander to scan for the encoder used then Adobe Audio to see the frequency and deduce wether it's real or not.

How do you do that?

quote:

Originally posted by dj christian How do you do that?

FHG 16| 22 (20)
FHG No Cut-off

Lame 3,93 0|20 (21)
Lame 3,95 0|19
Lame 3,96 0|19 (18)
Lame 3,97 16|20 (21)

This is the frequency cut scheme that indicate where the different encoders should cut at for genuine 320 kbps mp3s. It was given to me by a German audio-engineering student. I never put much trust in it, but compared some unknown sources with retail-bought 320 and they seemed to match.

To see the encoder, use either some dbpoweramp extension of Total Commander by opening the binary file information and scrolling down. The LAME/FHG version should be there.

I haven't used this since 2008 though.

a bit off topic but why is it that when a promo CD is released, people tend to rip them as VBR around the 224kbps area? I don't see the logic in doing this over 320Kbps.

quote:

Originally posted by yourma2000 a bit off topic but why is it that when a promo CD is released, people tend to rip them as VBR around the 224kbps area? I don't see the logic in doing this over 320Kbps.

Referring to illegal content?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.