Sorry, but No.
MPEG Version 2 (short MPEG2) specifies the Low Frequency extensions
to MPEG Version 1. MPEG2 is supperior in terms of low bitrates
and high compression, it is inferior in respect to quality.
If quality matters, use MPEG Version 1 Layer 3.
Yours
Martin Ruckert
george steeves wrote:
> So this being so it would seem that 160kb/s MPEG2 is the best bit rate and
> format for layer 3 as MPEG2 is superior to MPEG1??
>
> George
>
>
> On 11/22/06, Ruckert Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Things to keep apart: Version and Layer
>>
>>MPEG Version 1 specifies 3 Layers 1,2, and 3
>>within Version 1 we have a restricted selection of three
>>sample rates: 32kHz, 44.1kHz or 48kHz
>>and bitrates:
>>32kBit/s to 448kBit/s for layer 1
>>32kBit/s to 384kBit/s for layer 2 and
>>32kBit/s to 320kBit/s for layer 3
>>
>>MPEG Version 2 introduces new
>>sample rates: 16kHz, 22.05kHz or 24kHz
>>with different bitrates:
>>32kBit/s to 256kBit/s for layer 1
>>8kBit/s to 160kBit/s for layer 2 and 3
>>
>>There is an extension without an ISO Standard called MPEG version 2.5
>>again with different
>>sample rates: 8kHz, 11.025kHz or 12kHz
>>with different bitrates:
>>8kBit/s to 64kBit/s for layer 3
>>
>>So you see: you have to switch the version, if the sample rate is
>>changing.
>>You have to switch the layer if the bitrate is changing.
>>Now to the question:
>>From the above, you see, that while encoding a version 2 stream with one
>>of the
>>version 2 sample rates in layer 2, you can use only bitrates between 8kBit
>>and 160kBit.
>>If the bitrate has to increase beyond 160kBit, you can not switch to MPEG
>>version 1,
>>(because the sample rate has not changed), but you must switch to layer 1,
>>because
>>in layer 1 you can use bitrates up to 256kBit/s.
>>On the other hand you must switch back, if the bitrate is below 32kBit.
>>
>>Now which is better: typically layer 3 gives you a more compact encoding
>>therefore smaller bitrates are sufficient. So go with layer 3. The
>>version depends on the sample rate. Higher sample rates are typicaly
>>better
>>but not as compact to encode then lower sample rates. lame will
>>automatically
>>downsample in needed. leave it to lame to decide.
>>
>>
>>Yours
>> Martin Ruckert
>>
>>PS: these and other such details, you find in "Understanding MP3",
>>Springer Verlag.
>>
>>george steeves wrote:
>>
>>>mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>I have a question for which I can find no definitive answer. MPEG
>>
>>layer3
>>
>>>files are in two flavors MPEG1 and MPEG2. I know this is true as the
>>>Lame_enc.dll switches from MPEG2 to MPEG1 when the bit rate is increased
>>>beyond 160kb/s. I have read the source code and I know this is so. Is
>>
>>this
>>
>>>only true of the Lame encoder or only true of the lame_enc.dll. What is
>>
>>the
>>
>>>difference? Which is better? Why?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>-------------------------------------
>>Prof.Dr.Martin Ruckert
>>Munich University of Applied Sciences
>>FB07 Mathematics and Computer Science
>>Lothstrasse 34
>>D-80335 Munich
>>GERMANY
>>_______________________________________________
>>mp3encoder mailing list
>>mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org
>>https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
>>
>
>
>
>
--
-------------------------------------
Prof.Dr.Martin Ruckert
Munich University of Applied Sciences
FB07 Mathematics and Computer Science
Lothstrasse 34
D-80335 Munich
GERMANY
_______________________________________________
mp3encoder mailing list
mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org
https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
