iTunes Conversion Speed
- Thread starter ScottW
- Start date
GadgetLover
Senior Member & Tech Guru
What is the difference between joint and normal stereo? Also, what is your typical file size (per minute) at 192k-- 2mb?
(For those of you who reply in this thread, please also visit the thread "iTunes encoding quality", as I am trying to create a thorough and comprehensive informational thread on iTunes encoding of mp3s (quality vs. size). I'd like to eventually have the thread listed in the FAQ section. Thanks.
shatfield1529
s|hatfield not shat|field
Well...
With a 600mHz iMac w/ 256 MB of RAM, I can get up to 6-7x, but most of the time it hovers around 4-5x. This is at 128 kbps CBR.
Question, tho:
For those who use LAME, is it noticeably faster than iTunes? I've been thinking of switching permanently, but I haven't had much of a chance to compare the two.
With a 600mHz iMac w/ 256 MB of RAM, I can get up to 6-7x, but most of the time it hovers around 4-5x. This is at 128 kbps CBR.
Question, tho:
For those who use LAME, is it noticeably faster than iTunes? I've been thinking of switching permanently, but I haven't had much of a chance to compare the two.
chemistry_geek
Registered
I get between 5.8X to 6.3X MP3 encoding. When importing, the computer does not do any other tasks.
iTunes MP3 Encoding direct from the Preferences:
Input Using: MP3 Encoder.
8kbps(mono) / 320kbps (stereo), joint stereo.
Smart encoding is checked.
Songs do NOT play while encoding.
The way I see it, why waste all that bandwidth for a mono-type audio file? Everything today is stereo.
1427 Songs, 4:09:14:17 total time, 10.46GB
My Specs:
Blue & White G3, 500MHz, 768MB RAM, 12GB IBM UltraATA (Mac OS 9), 18GB IBM UltraSCSI (Mac OS X), 2930 Adaptec SCSI Card, Rage 128 graphics card. Screen resolution 1152 x 870, millions of colors.
iTunes MP3 Encoding direct from the Preferences:
Input Using: MP3 Encoder.
8kbps(mono) / 320kbps (stereo), joint stereo.
Smart encoding is checked.
Songs do NOT play while encoding.
The way I see it, why waste all that bandwidth for a mono-type audio file? Everything today is stereo.
1427 Songs, 4:09:14:17 total time, 10.46GB
My Specs:
Blue & White G3, 500MHz, 768MB RAM, 12GB IBM UltraATA (Mac OS 9), 18GB IBM UltraSCSI (Mac OS X), 2930 Adaptec SCSI Card, Rage 128 graphics card. Screen resolution 1152 x 870, millions of colors.
GadgetLover
Senior Member & Tech Guru
Can you explain more about the mono v. stereo thing? Can you lower the mono part without effecting ANY of the sound quality in stereo?? I, too, could care less if my files do not have the ability to be played on a monoral system but I DO care that no quality is lost by reducing the mono channel to 8k (as you did) instead of (160k -- 1/2 of 320k). I can't believe that you can encode at 329k that many songs and have it only be 10GB. I have 2,000 songs encoded (at 128k) and it is 8GB.
chemistry_geek
Registered
GadgetLover
I simply played around with listening to the encoded MP3's to determine if there was a difference in audio from 320kbps (mono) / 320kbps (stereo) to 8kbps (mono) / 320kbps (stereo). I may have read something on the internet several years ago about encoding the mono tracks and stereo tracks. I don't remember all the details, but I'm sure if you start up Sherlock and type "MP3" or "MPEG" or "MPEG Encoding" or something, it will find the official MPEG website. I got much of my information from an MP3 encoder I used to use called "MPecker Encoder" later renamed to "MPegger". I don't know if it's still around since iTunes does just about everything. The MPecker Encoder came with an MPEG information file (I think) that explained beautifully the difference between sound quality of MP2 and MP3. Many of my first MP2 and MP3 are encoded at a variety of bit rates just to compare the differences. Inever re-encoded them, just didn't seem worth it to me.
See this post (http://www.press3.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=10493) for why I never re-encoded them at the higher bit rate.
As far as I know, lowering the mono portion of the recording does not lower the sound quality of a stereo audio file. I remember reading this with the MPecker Encoder docs somewhere.
chemistry_geek
I simply played around with listening to the encoded MP3's to determine if there was a difference in audio from 320kbps (mono) / 320kbps (stereo) to 8kbps (mono) / 320kbps (stereo). I may have read something on the internet several years ago about encoding the mono tracks and stereo tracks. I don't remember all the details, but I'm sure if you start up Sherlock and type "MP3" or "MPEG" or "MPEG Encoding" or something, it will find the official MPEG website. I got much of my information from an MP3 encoder I used to use called "MPecker Encoder" later renamed to "MPegger". I don't know if it's still around since iTunes does just about everything. The MPecker Encoder came with an MPEG information file (I think) that explained beautifully the difference between sound quality of MP2 and MP3. Many of my first MP2 and MP3 are encoded at a variety of bit rates just to compare the differences. Inever re-encoded them, just didn't seem worth it to me.
See this post (http://www.press3.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=10493) for why I never re-encoded them at the higher bit rate.
As far as I know, lowering the mono portion of the recording does not lower the sound quality of a stereo audio file. I remember reading this with the MPecker Encoder docs somewhere.
chemistry_geek
zootbobbalu
Registered
I get 5-6 times with my G4 Cube 450MHz. But I have
a bunch of RAM (768M). If iTunes is being nice to other apps the conversion rate falls down to the 2-4 times range.
a bunch of RAM (768M). If iTunes is being nice to other apps the conversion rate falls down to the 2-4 times range.
rezba
simpleutilisateurpuissant
It of course depends on the processor. With the 733 I have at work, 7-8 is effectivly the common speed. With the dual 533, it's most commonly 12 to 15 encoding mp3, 25-27 encoding aiff. With the dual 800, difference is just sensible : 15x, sometimes 18x. Long live to duals...
bubbajim
Mac-Junkie
I encode @ 192k, true stereo.
I was getting around 13-15x with my OEM DVD-RAM drive, but I got tired of using an external CDburner, so I got a Toshiba 4x4x4x24 combo drive. My speeds dropped down to 5x when encoding. I got by on that for a couple of months, then the 8x speed model was available, so I got the Toshiba 8x8x8x32x combo drive. Now I get between 9-11x. When I was importing at 15x, I'll tell ya, it took no more than 10-15 seconds to rip a 4 minute song. Also be aware that the speeds will vary depending where the song is located on the Cd and that the fastest speeds tend to be the last couple of songs you import (near the center of the cd).
Music is imported onto a 60GB 7200rpm Maxtor drive.
I was getting around 13-15x with my OEM DVD-RAM drive, but I got tired of using an external CDburner, so I got a Toshiba 4x4x4x24 combo drive. My speeds dropped down to 5x when encoding. I got by on that for a couple of months, then the 8x speed model was available, so I got the Toshiba 8x8x8x32x combo drive. Now I get between 9-11x. When I was importing at 15x, I'll tell ya, it took no more than 10-15 seconds to rip a 4 minute song. Also be aware that the speeds will vary depending where the song is located on the Cd and that the fastest speeds tend to be the last couple of songs you import (near the center of the cd).
Music is imported onto a 60GB 7200rpm Maxtor drive.
Jadey
sosumi
If you plan on encoding, mixing then burning back to a regular audio CD, encode in stereo 'cause mono files can't play on a regular stereo system. You could convert them from mono to stereo after, but that's an extra step.
Does anyone know of a faster encoder for X? Someone mentioned LAME. Is it faster?
Does anyone know of a faster encoder for X? Someone mentioned LAME. Is it faster?