• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Topic: Malmsjö Demo Update

  1. #1

    Malmsjö Demo Update

    I have just updated the Malmsjö Acoustic Grand website with two demos in new genres, one jazz, and one impressionist piece. I have included full-length versions as well as excerpts in 250kBit/s, 128kBit/s and 96kBit/s.

    All \"java-buttons\" are now removed because they did not function on all computers.

    If you would like to listen in shortly, try these direct links below. Two excerpts:


    [This message has been edited by Hans Adamson (edited 08-26-2000).]

  2. #2

    Re: Malmsjö Demo Update

    Hans, the higher encoding rates are much better, I can tell this is a nice sounding piano. Let us know when it\'s for sale, I\'ll pick it up.

    But still you need a better encoder, a good encoder at 256 will be nearly perfect and your encoder is still doing terrible damage to the attack transients. What are you using?

    best wishes,

  3. #3

    Re: Malmsjö Demo Update


    After reading your suggestions I bought the Mp3 Producer Professional which has Fraunhofer encoder. After comparing the output at 256, 128 and 96, I decided to use the Fraunhofer on the 256kbit/s sample but stay with the Xing on the two lower rates. I read up a little bit on these encoders, and found that where Fraunhofer tries to reproduce the frequences all the way up to 20K, the Xing and the LAME for instant cuts at 16k. The Fraunhofer seemed to distort HF more at the lower bitrates when applied to these samples.

    Below is a website with a very thorough test of different encoders. It does suggest that the Franhofer would be the best encoder at 128kBit/s. My own listening tests did not confirm that on these recordings. The Fraunhofer HF sounded distorted at 128kBit/s but the Xing mostly ignore everything above 16k.



  4. #4

    Re: Malmsjö Demo Update

    If you want to try the LAME mp3 encoder, you might start here:

    Follow the links from there to compiled versions of Lame on a russian fellows site, and maybe pick up the Razorlame front end.

    I suggest running Lame 3.86 in high quality mode, joint-stereo at 128 and below, and stereo above that. Try it out, see if you hear a difference in your encodings.


  5. #5

    Re: Malmsjö Demo Update

    Hans, I visited the site you mentioned where mp3 encoders are rated. I can\'t believe the rating of Xing at 128! The test results, if they are accurate, suggest the Xing encoder is equivalent to or better than Lame, especially above 16 k. My experience completely contradicts this result. I moved to LAME from Xing (at 128) because with Xing many of my files were unlistenable.

    Anyhow, it\'s a shame that most mp3 sites still use 128 as the standard, since it is demonstrably inferior to current cd standards.

    I listened to the new high bit-rate classical offering. It sounds every bit as good as I thought it would. And like Sam, I\'ll be ordering your sample whenever it\'s ready!

    John Grant http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/42/john_lewis_grant.html

  6. #6

    Re: Malmsjö Demo Update

    Sam, John,

    Thanks, I have downloaded the LAME and Razorlame and I am going to check it out.


  7. #7

    Re: Malmsjö Demo Update

    Of course, if you have Fraun., you probably have the best. LAME, however, is noticeably faster--if that\'s relevant.

    John Grant http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/42/john_lewis_grant.html

Go Back to forum

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts