What Mp3 encoder would you recomend? I've tried N2Mp3, too slow (only encodes at 1x... Am I doing something wrong here?) and SoundJam MP, too expensive! Yes, I do pay for my shareware, while I refuse to pay $20 for a CD (in Sweden).

Thanks!

Kristjan

------------------

iMac DVSE 400 MHz/128 Mb/13 Gb/9.0.4
Kristjan.Revelj.com

[noliv]

DropMP3 (based on LAME) is slow too, but it's free and makes very good quality mp3 (and not VERY slow I think).

AudioCatalyst (Xing) is the fastest.

I use both of them.

[Chris_G]

Musicmatch Jukebox has an mp3 encoder for Macs that seems to work pretty well... plus its free!

Cheers!
Chris

[Lukas]

I can also recommend DropMP3 , the quality is really excellent. You can make it run faster if you want but then the quality might drop a bit. Also, don't forget to download the LAME SharedLib from the site, that's the engine it needs to run.

As for MusicMatch Jukebox -- forget it. Bad quality, many bugs, ugly interface. This sofware is about as bad as RealPlayer & Co. Don't let them kill your Mac...

------------------
Lukas

P.S. I forgot, DropMP3 can only encode AIFF or WAV files. If you want to encode CD audio files you have to convert them first. Get SoundApp for that, it's free as well. It's also a great player for almost any sound format available.

[This message has been edited by Lukas (edited 12-01-2000).]

Originally posted by Chris_G:
Musicmatch Jukebox has an mp3 encoder for Macs that seems to work pretty well... plus its free!

I used Music Match on the PC for a while. The PC version is insanly fast but the interface and stability really sucks.

------------------

iMac DVSE 400 MHz/128 Mb/13 Gb/9.0.4
Kristjan.Revelj.com

[elzinat]

n2mp3 is not great. sound quality is fine, but it is too slow. although the integration features are cool, they're really not that useful or at all necessary.
AudioCatalyst is incredibly fast, but the sound quality is less than good.
MPegger [shareware sequel to the freeware MPecker, which stopped being freeware in its beta stage b/c the encoding algorithms were patented, so they had to pay] has the best sound quality I have heard from any Mac mp3 encoder.
haven't used DropMP3.

------------------
be happy!
-mac freak

I use BladeEnc, I like it.
http://www.helsinki.fi/~pkamppur/bladeencmac.html

[jwardell]

The ShockWave Audio plugin for SoundEdit (free from Macromedia) is still the benchmark for quality. It is horrendously slow though.

The only encoder that I have found to approach SWA's quality is AudioCatalyst. Make sure however that under Encoder preferences, click advanced and make sure High Frequency Mode is selected. The best thing about audiocatalyst is that it is blazing fast as well.

On a side note, does anyone know how to use the Advanced Naming Options in Audiocatalyst? I can't find any documentation on this anywhere.

Hello, here's just my opinion. If you go for the quality regardless of the cost, Cleaner 5 (The updated version of Media Cleaner 4.0.2) would be the best. It provides the most professional features and codec and automation. I have made a test of MP3 encorders weighing on the quality, not the speed. Especially at lower bit rate (64 ~ 128 Kbps), the quality difference is more obvious. (Trust my ear. It's not only subjective preference. I'm a media professional and also a piano tuner. For me, 256 Mbps MP3 file sounds much different from the original, though it is quite acceptable. At the same data rate--256 Kbps--ATRAC 4.5 encoded MiniDisc sound is almost identical to the original. I hope Sony will realeas soft ATRAC.)

Cleaner 5 is not a speed king, though. Quality demands patience. On the other hand, it supports Dual processor intensively, from the nature of the software: Industry standard media encoder. So, it is expensive, too. Fortunately, it comes with Fraunhofer IIS codec as basic. (around $400) But if you want Sorenson video codec developer's edition and QDesign Music 2 Pro codec, you have to pay three times of the basic edition.

Still, do you want to pay $400 to make your own MP3 library? At least, the quality is guaranteed...

Ho year I'm a professional. Trust my ears I listen the difference between 256K MP3 from AudioCD, heh yeah cool. First you should know that your mp3 files should be encoded in MPEG2 layer 2 not 3 if you use those high bitrate, because mpg2a is same size and BETTER quality at high bitrates (higher than 192K). Media Cleaner Pro encode fine, but it's not in my opinion the best however. I think everyone should listen (if they can) to the encoded song befor' they buy (and different musics too, it make huges differences from encoders to encoders). I'm using AudioCatalyst in VBR medium/high, HiFreq filtering on. I think it is the best compromise regarding speed and audio quality. But lastest SoundJam is not so bad too. I don't really like the sound of Media Cleaner...sometime pops and crackle... sight. I don't like Frau's IIS encoder.. Xing's one I like =) LAME is cool too, but DropMP3 is damn slower...
and QDesignMusic2 is just not MP3. ATRAC is another cool thing.. in his time. MP3 has much better quality. ATRAC encode twice as big files as 160K VBR MP3's with very little better quality...

[ericwass]

I use Sound Jam MP (yes I paid for it!) and the range seems a little flat on VBR (medium high). The irritating thing is that the levels seem much lower than anything I'd get off Napster. So when I play it back on my Nomad you can't get great volume out of it. Anyone know how to fix this???

[stetsows]

I've got both N2MP3 and SoundJam MP. N2MP3's best feature is definitely its interface. Speed isn't the greatest (you definitely want a G3 or better). SoundJam, though is probably the best product on the market. At $35 you get a full featured MP3/CD Player and an MP3 Encoder. Also it handles fun things like skins, visual plugins, etc. If you've got one of those new multiprocessor G4s it supports multiproceesing. C&G is also good about supporting newer Apple technologies (there is already an OSX compliant beta available).

As for the cost ,look at it this way. N2MP3 costs $35, I believe Audion costs about $18. Total cost $53, definitely not the most affordable way to go.

I use MPegger to encode 256kb/s MP2s. On my G3/400 it encodes at 4x, and on my G3/500 it encodes at 5x. I think you could probably extrapolate for different G3 speeds. The quality is great and the fee is resonable ($25.00 for web version). I'm currently putting my 500+ CD collection on an 80GB external firewire drive and its going real well.

[marka]

I used MPecker several years ago. It worked fairly well, however I did notice what seemed like a bit of harmonic distortion in the highs. This was some time ago with an older version.

I use SoundJam MP. It's easy to use. I always use VBR high or highest. I always leave the setting "best quality" versus "faster."

Encoding screams at 4x-8x or faster on my G4/500 MP depending on the source material. The quality seems great.

One annoyance is I can't specify layer II or layer III.

Does anyone know if SoundJam MP is smart about this? Or does it always encode layer III?

I've set up a test area. Let's decide on some reference source material and post some samples for all to compare (no full songs please).

Remember to describe what you use and how you encoded the sample.

Apple's iDisk:

name is: macnn_mp3
password is: layerIII



[This message has been edited by marka (edited 12-02-2000).]

For VBR encoding, the best by far is a recent version of LAME. Best of all would be the latest LAME beta on a Unix box (including Mac OS X or LinuxPPC), but if you want to do this on the Mac OS go with DropMP3 and the most recent version of LAME that's been ported to it. This is also good for 128-256kbps CBR encoding (though there's really no point with a good VBR encoder available, which LAME really has become).

N2MP3 is probably the next best quality encoder after LAME. I'm not really certain of how smart its VBR encoding is, though, so you might want to stick to 160-192kbps CBR. It costs money, though, so I'd personally stick with LAME.

The SWA export XTRA (with the mp3 encoder 0.12 shell) uses the Fraunhofer reference code, and does a good job at 128kbps CBR, but *only* at that rate - it goes a little nuts at higher rates. This is a general principle of encoders, btw - many of them are optimised for particular bitrate ranges. LAME is, again, among the most flexible, but it really wants to be used with somewhat higher rates except for places where VBR can optimise (like silence).

BladeEnc makes peculiar tradeoffs to preserve some areas of sound shaping at the expense of others. Some people find this to their liking, and others don't (finding the reproduced sound "flat" or otherwise objectionable). It's not a bad encoder for high bitrates, but most people will prefer LAME overall.

The other payware encoders (SoundJam et al) are generally unremarkable, except that AudioCatalyst, like all Xing encoders, is a piece of junk (artifacts, distortion, just say no to Xing).

I make no reference to speed here because I really don't care how long it takes. You only have to encode it once and you'll listen to it a thousand times, so IMO the real issue is sound quality - and I've never seen an encoder win speed without having to sacrifice quality (this is Xing's biggest problem).

[andymcdeee]

The Mp3 export in Protools works pretty well......

...fairly impractical unless it's your own music (which it should be anyway).

oooooh, i'll get everyone hating the anti-mp3 guy.....

Well, let me tell you, SoundJam is INCREDIBLE with a G4 MP...Speed ROCKS, and quality IS as good as anything else out there.

5 Star product, no need for anything else!

while it is a bit dated, you might want to check out the encoder review over at mac digital audio. they covered just about every encoder available. review: http://www.macdigitalaudio.com/reviews/encoders/

personally i use bladeEnc on mac os x - and i have seen excellent encoding times and quality. i do not think that there are mac os x build instructions in the current release of bladeEnc [ official site: http://bladeenc.mp3.no/ ] but you can download the binary from: http://proclus.tripod.com/darwin/

/jean-pierre

There is another encoder comparison here: http://users.belgacom.net/gc247244/index.html -- select "Analysis" from the menu on the left.

I use N2MP3, if you are listening to the track as you encode it, then it will only encode at 1.0. My G3/400 sppeds up significantly if I donlt listen at the same time. I like it because I think it has the slickest interface.

[marka]

Just encoded a bunch of test material with SoundJam MP and DropMP3 (which uses the Lame encoding algorithm).

They both seem very comparable, especially at high bit rates for with CBR and VBR. At low bit rates, DropMP3 files sound better to my ear.

As expected, performance for DropMP3 was much slower than SoundJam MP, probably due largely to SoundJam MP's ability to use multiple processors. The Lame encoder was said to be optimized for AltiVec, but was still significantly slower than SoundJam MP.

Two questions:

1) Isn't it generally better to use layer II for high bitrate encoding?

2) Is there such a thing as VBR for layer II?

I couldn't compare SoundJam MP's layer II files because DropMP3 only creates layer III.

If anyone's interested I'll post the results for others' ears. Respond to let me know.


[This message has been edited by marka (edited 12-04-2000).]

[Jaharmi]

I care about speed somewhat, but I went out and bought N2MP3 because it automated things that I would want to have done for me. It does a nice job of integrating with the CDDB, for example. (Even in the Finder, where it renames your CD and tracks for you, which is nice. I hear SoundJam does this now, as well.)

Of all the encoders mentioned, I'm aware of only N2MP3 and SoundJam that offer CDDB integration. Has that changed? Do the other encoders add IDv3 tags based on CDDB info, automatically?

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I feel that this saves time for me in the long run. I don't have to edit the information later.

I also like N2MP3's file naming. I'm sure it's not the best, but it labels songs by the names (no artist, alas). It truncates them as needed to fit in the filename character limit, and of course, adds ".mp3". The one drawback I see is that it puts a track number and dash at the beginning of the filename, but I have A Better Finder Rename to handle things like this (need to if you have an old digital camera, which I do ... filenames from those things were terrible).

Does anyone have a review (a table, say) of the encoders and what convenience features they support? That's also useful information, on top of the sound quality.

------------------
Jeremy J. Reichman, aka "Jaharmi"

[dbergstrom]

I have both SoundJam and AudioCatalyst.

I stopped using AudioCatalyst (even removed it from my drive) after SoundJam got to about version 2. I've been using SoundJam ever since and have been quite happy with it. I always encoded at high bit rates and was pleased with the speed and the sound.

A couple of weeks ago, I bought a Rio600. It was like my life turned upside down - no more high bitrate files for me (not if I want more than 15 minutes of music on my 32MB player). I started using SoundJam 2.5.2 to encode low bitrate recordings - and it SUCKS! For VBR recording, you set a minimum bit rate and then the VBR quality. No matter what you set for quality, it "hugs" the minimum bitrate (i.e. there's essentially no difference between low and high quality if you are set at a minimum of 64 kbs - the low quality file averages about 64 kbs and the high quality file about 66 kbs). Even on the highest quality, files created with a low bit rate minimum sound horrible. It is a very STUPID encoder, not capable of making good choices about the music.

AudioCatalyst 2.1 is much smarter about VBR. You just set the desired quality, it makes the bitrate decisions. "Low" quality encodings from AudioCatalyst sound worlds better than encodings made with similar settings from SoundJam. These encodings are certainly good enough for portable use or listening in the car. I can fit over an hour of piano sonatas or just under an hour of symphonic music/rock/jazz on my 32 MB player with AudioCatalyst "low" quality VBR.

Two specific points in response to other posts:
1) AudioCatalyst supports CDDB.
2) codes for the advanced naming option in AudioCatalyst are available under the Help menu (launches an HTML file). "%3" = track number; "%4" = track name, I forget the rest.

All of this would be a moot point if Rio ever came out with the Rio600 "backpacks" with additional memory.