Marty, Unfortunately, Lame is known to be not really optimized for low-bitrate encoding. The closest option would be to the Fraunhofer codec at 22 KHz/32 kbps (the ACM codec bundled with Windows can encode at that rate). If it is voice, you should try speech codecs - they will get you much better quality at the kind of bitrates you want. I'd suggest Speex.
Are you transcoding? (i.e. you don't have the original 22 KHz/16-bit PCM (WAV) audio, but are using the 192 kbps MP3 as the "source")? Cheers, -Ishaan On 3/15/07, Marty Huntzberry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The only effect in audacity and lame that seems to work is reducing the > audio. Why does it sound good in it's original mp3 format of 192 kbps and > 44 > khz but sounds bad at 24 kbps and 22 khz? It's mainly a voice lecture. > > On Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:12:53 +0530 > "tech list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Marty, unfortunately, there's not much you can do since the recording > itself > was low quality. 22KHz should have been OK for voice, but looks like the > mic > was placed badly > or the acoustics of your room/hall was not the best. > Your best bet would be to forget about lame for the moment and try out > with > some audio > tools like audacity. Keep a copy of the original recording and play around > with some noise > cancellation, filtering etc. to see what sounds best. > > > On 1/24/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I have a lecture recording (no music, just voice) that was recorded with > a > > digital recorder about 1 foot from the speaker at 22 kHz and 16 bit > > mono. It sounds like the speaker is in a well. Can I clean the > recording > > up a bit with a filter in lame? > > > > Marty > > > _______________________________________________ > mp3encoder mailing list > mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder > _______________________________________________ mp3encoder mailing list mp3encoder@minnie.tuhs.org https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
