variable rate mp3 suck monkey ballz

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- variable rate mp3 suck monkey ballz

Posted by court-jester on Feb-26-2003 00:26:

variable rate mp3 suck monkey ballz

any one know how to seek forward with these files cause whenever i try it just starts from the begining of the file

Posted by extulas on Feb-26-2003 01:26:

Re: variable rate mp3 suck monkey ballz

quote:
Originally posted by court-jester
any one know how to seek forward with these files cause whenever i try it just starts from the begining of the file

I agree strongly. The best way to get rid of this is to re-convert it. And this only works 50%-75% of the time, Its worth a try. Whoever made Variable Bitrate sucks. I know OGG (Ogg Vorbis) uses variable, But its totally different then MP3. GOod luck man, Maybe with our forces we can kill variable bitrate!

Posted by arctic on Feb-26-2003 02:02:

WHAT A STUPID THING TO SAY!

VBR is much BETTER than cbr, it provides better quality, because the bitrate can go up and down with the music as requried. If you are using windows media player, of course you will have problems, WMP cannot read them properly. Any decent player can handle them fine. If you knew anything about the topic, you would not be slagging them off.

Posted by whitesmoke on Feb-26-2003 03:48:

get winamp 2 (3 sucks). i have never had a problem with vbr using it. oh and vbr is much better.

Posted by court-jester on Feb-26-2003 04:21:

lol funny you mention WMP since it actully DOES play them properly while winamp 2.78 which i have does NOT ... i mean it plays them fine its just i cant seek forward the damm file!

Posted by whitesmoke on Feb-26-2003 04:23:

is it with all your vbr of just a couple of them? i can seek though all my vbr in winamp...also are they mp3 that you ripped yourself?

Posted by KilldaDJ on Feb-26-2003 18:31:

VBR stinks, quality maybe better, but its slow to encode and most mp3 editing/mixing programs/utilities wont accept them

-end

Posted by webbie on Feb-26-2003 18:35:

Then you should complain on the makers of the programs because VBR
is a part of the .mp3 standard which all programs that aims to play
mp3's should follow and support.

If a roadsign says "50 mph" and your car can only do 30 mph then
it isnt the roadsign that is faulty.

Posted by whitesmoke on Feb-26-2003 18:49:

quote:
Originally posted by webbie
Then you should complain on the makers of the programs because VBR
is a part of the .mp3 standard which all programs that aims to play
mp3's should follow and support.

If a roadsign says "50 mph" and your car can only do 30 mph then
it isnt the roadsign that is faulty.

hahaha

Posted by tu_face on Feb-26-2003 18:58:

quote:
Originally posted by court-jester
lol funny you mention WMP since it actully DOES play them properly while winamp 2.78 which i have does NOT ... i mean it plays them fine its just i cant seek forward the damm file!

get 2.81 then... its been around for long enough

Posted by Ray_Finkle on Feb-26-2003 20:34:

Encode in --alt-preset standard and you tell me if your precious 192 rips sound better. I wish the release groups would smarten up and start encoding in APS as it is farrrrrrrrrrrrr superior.

Posted by bassaholix on Feb-26-2003 21:45:

VBR is cool.. but not perfected.. i still prefer 192kpbs... dunno why...

Posted by Master on Feb-26-2003 21:51:

you dont know why...

Becuase your ignorant. VBR lowers the bitrate during parts of the tune where it doesnt matter, making the file smaller without taking away any of the quality.

The first time I encoded in VBR I noticed it tweaking out in winamp and I was like WTF but when you realize how much hard drive space you can save without losing any audible quality, its definately worth it.

OGG also is great!

Posted by decibel08 on Feb-26-2003 22:19:

quote:
Originally posted by KilldaDJ
VBR stinks, quality maybe better, but its slow to encode and most mp3 editing/mixing programs/utilities wont accept them

-end

im not sure what programs you're using, but my mp3 utilities and encoders all accept vbr like one of their own children. if you really care about the quality of the mp3, you wont mind a few extra seconds to encode with vbr.

no one has mentioned the best part about vbr yet... yes it reduces the bitrate when there isn't much going on and thus brings the filesize way down, but it also bumps the bitrate up for a much higher audio resolution when the signal gets complicated.

vbr = definitely the way to go

-dannyB--

Posted by tranceman78 on Feb-26-2003 22:24:

Just when you thought TA couldn't get any dorkier... We now have people fighting over the optimal way to encode mp3's.

Posted by mr. poopyhead on Feb-26-2003 22:35:

i dunno why everyone hates VBR... its SO much more efficient... i've only had problems with crappy vbr mp3s that have been cut or are incomplete... that's the only time you get seeking problems... i rip all my cds in vbr and i never have problems with them... use exactaudiocopy (www.exactaudiocopy.de) and use lame encoder and you'll never have problems..

i've always wondered why ripping groups don't use VBR... constant bitrate licks balls compared to VBR...

VBR = same size file (or smaller) + same or better quality than CBR... whats the problem here? =P

Posted by kevM on Feb-26-2003 22:43:

VBR all the way ... I encode all my MP3s using LAME --alt-preset standard

oh and I rip every thing with exactaudiocopy

Posted by arctic on Feb-27-2003 02:12:

i use alt preset standard as well, lame, vbr etc.....it is MUCH better than 192...

and tranceman78, in what way is that lame?

Posted by Pointy on Feb-27-2003 06:51:

If you didn't pay for the music, then you have no grounds what so ever on which to complain, so quit ur bitching and go by the CD/Vinyl, i can tell you that you wont have to worry about the quality of ur mp3s