rail bar

skip to content

search news:

filter news by category:

filter news by date:

poll:

What do you think of us populating the Album Artist tag?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

twitter updates:

news

Thanks for your input

The votes are in, and counting our staff, we've decided to move to V0 after all.

rape

posted by Godai on 12 September

comments

comment #1

I'm going to be the first V2 person who is utterly disappointed (though I'm actually not).

So let me just speak for everyone else who has nothing better to say than "AWW GAY".

...AWW GAY!

comment posted by MalaiseDivinity on 12 September

comment #2

It was a dumb debate anyway. You should do whatever you want, its not like there was any noticable difference in the first place.

comment posted by xybur on 12 September

comment #3

Seriously. As I had said in the "debate", I can hardly even tell the difference when listening at V6, so I don't see the point of it.

People seemed to be satisfied with 128kbps CBR back when it all began and now they SWEAR they know the difference between these high bitrate VBR formats.

At least no one had a nervous breakdown and suddenly decided to shut down the site :D.

comment posted by MalaiseDivinity on 12 September

comment #4

Ah crap, and I thought V1 was going to win.

comment posted by Mazinger on 12 September

comment #5

YEAH! *g*

comment posted by LiquidAcid on 12 September

comment #6

Some people can tell, some people can't. It's all about personal sensitivity and listening equipment.

comment posted by thatbox on 12 September

comment #7

Come hither, yon 500GB hard drive. Let me line your innards with the best and the worst of the sonic soundscape of gaming past, present, and future, that when I die one might find a treasure trove of audio they would ne'er have heard otherwise.

No complaints here, considering that there is a Wild Arms rock album on the horizon.

comment posted by Arrogance on 12 September

comment #8

Woohoo!

comment posted by Desides on 12 September

comment #9

So about how bigger are the file sizes going to be?

comment posted by dre on 12 September

comment #10

I hope you'll be getting your hands on the metal slug box :)

comment posted by what? on 12 September

comment #11

Yeah I'm kinda interested in how much the diffrence will be in filesize :) I'm pretty sure it's hard to tell, but can maybe someone tell the diffrence when making a compression of the same file in both V1 and V0?

Where can I read more about V0 V1 qualities too? :D

comment posted by Elrinth on 12 September

comment #12

As long as you don't start replaygaining all of them and let the minority of folks who want it DO IT THEMSELVES (cuz not everyone's gonna want the same volume level change) I won't be too irritated. Asides from the fact that this'll eat up HDD and CD-R space faster.

comment posted by wvlfpvp on 12 September

comment #13

My hard drive am cry :(

For people wanting to know a little more about the settings: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=28124

comment posted by ojnk on 12 September

comment #14

"As long as you don’t start replaygaining all of them and let the minority of folks who want it DO IT THEMSELVES (cuz not everyone’s gonna want the same volume level change) I won’t be too irritated."

You know you can just strip Replay Gain tags and add your own, right?

comment posted by Desides on 12 September

comment #15

Awesome. V0 is great news.

comment posted by Mucknuggle on 12 September

comment #16

Damn, at least it will satisfy the audiophiles...not my hard drive, though =/

comment posted by Muzza on 13 September

comment #17

I C... so V0 is 245 kbit rate target.. with variable between 220 and 260
well probably wont be much diffrence in filesize compared to before...
thx for link ojnk

comment posted by Elrinth on 13 September

comment #18

V0 is fine but please do something to HELP THAT POOR WOMAN!

comment posted by jeriaska on 13 September

comment #19

You guys should have moved to mp4's or AAC. Blows any mp3 out of the water. And they are smaller in file size. But whatever you guys think works for the site, more power to ya!

comment posted by ffmusicdj on 13 September

comment #20

I think this is a good option (V0), besides, I had done some test with some tracks and in a V1 track of 18.5mb changed it to V0 increase to 19.6 only 1 MB this is not much. (I do the test with EAC and with the newest Lame available: wav size 121mb) :)

comment posted by evil baz on 13 September

comment #21

I don't even have a clue what the difference is. And what's with the creepy picture?!

comment posted by animetayl on 13 September

comment #22

Just glad you guys didn't go to V2.

I also think that picture is creepy as hell, bravo!

comment posted by Antignition on 13 September

comment #23

ffmusicdj

While i personally love the audio-quality of MP4s/AACs (same thing) the inability to use MP3gain on them really, really bugs me. To the point that i stick to mp3's so all my songs can be normalized.

I'm all for higher quality transfers. I already loved this site for having high quality transfers, and higher ones are even better.

I just rarely have time to finish listening to one soundtrack before another is done!

comment posted by Syl on 13 September

comment #24

Hooray! The best source of VGM just got better! Me and my 1TB graciously and hungrily await the next release!

comment posted by Dralsk on 14 September

comment #25

No complaints here. v0, v1 -vbr-new, not really a huge difference.

comment posted by Kilu on 14 September

comment #26

@ffmusicdj:

Why not using Vorbis? It has native replaygain support and performance can be compared to AAC. The only real problem is hardware support on standalones and greater RAM/CPU consumption then MP3. Apart from that Vorbis kicks ass *g*

And a(gain): @wvlfpvp: STFU, will ya?

comment posted by LiquidAcid on 14 September

comment #27

Well, I doubt gamemp3s will become gamevorbis or gameflacs or gameaacs. So let's just leave it as it is. Gamemp3s has such a nice, catchy sound anyway.

comment posted by deathray on 14 September

comment #28

Well, you know what this means...

Nanosweep 3 in V0... YAY. Whenever they release it...

comment posted by MalaiseDivinity on 14 September

comment #29

@Syl:
Yea, thats actually very true. There are many things mp4 can not do that mp3 can. I can see why mp4 was not even considered.

@LiquidAcid:
Well, I had a school assignment on this subject. I took a cd quality song, and converted it into wav, mp3, and mp4. Then I inverted the wav and compared it to the mp3 & 4 to see what was being lost quaity wise. The amount of audio that was being lost in an mp3 was massive compared to a mp4. And the mp4 was much smaller in size. But like I said earlier, There are many issues mp4 has with compatibility. So I can see why V0 is being used.

comment posted by ffmusicdj on 14 September

comment #30

can we just have FLACs? ;)

comment posted by moriya on 14 September

comment #31

dont most "mp3 players" not play mp4 or what not. So all the people who want to put songs on a mp3 cd player or iriver etc would have to convert to mp3 anyway from mp4 or whatever?

comment posted by Sirus on 14 September

comment #32

@ffmusicdj:
I don't quite understand what you mean by 'inverting' the wav?
Also you mean 'ripping to PCM' by '...converted it into wav', right?
How did you measure the loss in audio quality? Did you do any ABX tests?
You know that by simply looking at the waveforms you can't say how near the compressed signal is to the original one.

comment posted by LiquidAcid on 15 September

comment #33

I guess v0 is fine, although 1 or 2 would have been OK too. But what I don't get is what this all has to do with that creepy, slimy, disgusting Ronald McDonald? That guy is a monster freak!

comment posted by Shpain on 15 September

comment #34

Ok, dumb question but what is VO ???

comment posted by Flying Dragon on 15 September

comment #35

@Flying Dragon:
You know that for MPEG I Layer 3 (MP3) encoding you need an encoder. I'd say the best out there is LAME and therefore gamemp3s uses LAME for encoding. Of course LAME has some options for the encoding process, so you can decide how good the quality of the resulting file will be.
'V0' is a parameter indicating the VBR-encoding mode. For greater detail see: http://lame.sourceforge.net/USAGE

comment posted by LiquidAcid on 15 September

comment #36

"Ok, dumb question but what is VO ???"

V0, not VO. V0 refers to a certain quality level of encoding a LAME-MP3.

http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME -- go here and scroll down to "List of Recommended Settings." You'll see a chart that lists what each encoding level roughly corresponds to in terms of mp3 quality.

Basically, V0 is a slightly higher quality level than what #gamemp3s has been using for a while. I believe #gamemp3s will use V0 with the vbr-new tag, which is a welcome change. Now if album art would come embedded in the ID3 tags, I'd even donate money...

comment posted by Desides on 16 September

comment #37

Ditto on the album art. I'd donate like, a bajillion dollars just for album-art-out-of-the-folder. D:

And uh, that gif is extremely scary. D:

comment posted by Rein on 17 September

comment #38

@LiquidAcid:
Inverting means the exact opposite. So when you invert a .wav file, you are making all the sound waves opposite as opposed to the original. When you play a .Wav and the same .Wav only inverted side by side, they cancle each other out. It's like your multiplying a positive # with a negative # which equals nothing. When you play the mp3 and the Inverted wav file, what you should hear is what the mp3 cut out of the wav file, like what the MP3 lost from the wav file. Would you like examples? I can post examples for you :).

comment posted by ffmusicdj on 17 September

comment #39

I was so bored, I decided to make the wav file I was referring to.

I got a original copy of FF7 soundtrack.
I ripped the first track from the first cd into a wav 16 Bits 44khz
I first made a mp3 using VBR 128kbps V0 Joint stereo. (converted it back into wav 16 bits 44khz for testing purposes :) )
Then inverted the original wav file.

Download the mp3 (it's suppose to be in wav)
http://ffmusic.net/01%20Opening%20-%20Bombing%20Mission%20%5bFrom%20Final%20Fantasy%20VII%5dMP3%201_01.wav

Download the inverted wav file
http://ffmusic.net/01%20Opening%20-%20Bombing%20Mission%20%5bFrom%20Final%20Fantasy%20VII%5d.wav

Listen to them and see if you can tell the difference by sound.
If you play these files together at exactly the same time, you will hear what the mp3 left out of the original!
This is what you will hear.
http://ffmusic.net/difference.wav

That sound is what you do not hear when you convert a wav or PCM file into an mp3! Mp3 decides you don't need it anymore :p It sounds like trash but those frequencies are what make the song sound warm and full.

Don't believe me? You don't have to take my word for it, try it yourself! I gave you the inverted wav file, use Reason or Acid and play the files side by side! It's creepy because when you mute one track, it plays in full volume but when you play them together you hear what the mp3 has left out. Isn't this a cool little experiment?

comment posted by ffmusicdj on 17 September

leave a comment

footer

RSS feed