Hi there...

Does VCD compliancy include Mono-MP2s? And even more important: Can Headache output such a file? Any experiences?

__________________
j3llyG0053

More than VCD, SVCD and DVD supports it with no problem. I did four KDVD this week with 10h of VCD program using 96 kbps mono audio on each.

I did that with besweet. I never use Headac3che.

sometimes i use BeSweetGUI and it's good but
HeadAC3he results sounds better for me in musicals.

i see posts in the forum from many people with headac3he problems..
and some more with BeSweet problems...
i never did any problem with HeadAC3he !


Jell,
HeadAC3he can do mono files easily!

According to quality ....

HeadAC3he uses mp2enc.dll which can also be choosen i Besweet beside 2lame.dll .... but I never had bad experiences using 2lame.dll (maybe its just again a build thing?!)

According to mono ...
I also can't choose mono as output in HeadAC3he .. so maybe you got a newer version Jorel

I always do use mono mp2/ac3 encoding for example in case of "classics" captures as they veeeery often do come in mono, so why doing encoding them in stereo?!

ink wrote:
"According to mono ...
I also can't choose mono as output in HeadAC3he .. so maybe you got a newer version Jorel"
no ink,is the same version like all.

but Jell wrote:
"Does VCD compliancy include Mono-MP2s? And even more important: Can Headache output such a file? Any experiences?"
i understood that Jell needed the
channel configuration---> downmix type---> mono
not undestood as only one in channel mode,
the result will be MONO in 2 channelsl!

or lame

Yep that would be nonsense if mono is provided by two channels
In besweet I never got problems doing "real" mono encodings no matter if using 2lame.dll or mp2enc.dll as choice in besweet.

yeah, i see !

and the real mono can be used in the 2 channels with differents souces like:
German in the right,
English in left !
i never did it before cos i never needed that !

this is the idea ? (if is this the idea..)

Not at all. The idea is to have a better audio quality.

If your source is originally mono, then you can better do it in mono and not in stereo, you are right ?
Okay, now, if you do it as two channel mono, let say at 112 Kbits, it's like you do it in one channel mono at 56 Kbps (56 * 2 = 112). Right ?

I do all my one chanel mono streams at 96 kbps; So I have a far better quality than you have with your 112 kbps 2-channel mono stream. And a use less space on the disc for that !

fantastic option

But, when you set one channel mono, does the audio output for only one channel (left or right)?
I thought that mono has 2 channels with same audio in each one.
But if you record in one channel mono, sound go out only for one speaker (left or right)?

The st. VCD 2.0 can use:

Mono is Mono. Mono existed when Stereo didn't even cross from the brain of engineers and at this time, having one speaker was yet a miracle

Mono will come out of the center speaker if you have a 5.1 system, or from both front speakers (L+R) if you have a simple stereo installation (or a stereo TV).

that kinda sucks for my purpose. I just want to use it to save some space. So when I use mono on both channels (L+R) with 64kb/sec each, I'm back at the size of a 112kb/sec stereo mp2 right?

__________________
j3llyG0053

right Jell

Yes, but the question is why using mono on both channel?
If it's mono, keep it at mono, and encode at 64 (or 96) kbps.
You will have the sound quality of 128 (or 192) kbps stereo using half the space.

@muaddib: Well I guess I don't want my whole sound coming from the center-box and Subwoofer.

I actually wonder why you can't make the receiver to play a the mono stream on L+R and on the Center at the same time... would that sound bad?

btw: good to have you back!

__________________
j3llyG0053

Jelly, you will have this simply by turning off your 5.1 decoder. Like when you are listening an audio CD : you put (or are supposed to put) your receiver in Stereo mode.
This way the center is not use and for sure, the sound from L+F as I explained !

Note : You can't have L+R+C with a mono signal as the definition of the center chanel (when you are not in discrete encoding like AC3 or DTS) is : the center receives the mono signal that is present on both L and R channels, and this signal is substacted from the L+R.

If you don't substract it from L+R, you will have a signal a +3db (double of the power).

jell,
today i change my signature and was wrote there:
10 speakers around the ears....

i have one simple 5.1 and + 2 stereo amplifiers (Akai and Polivox)
see one of the reasons that i'm still using the stereo amplifiers:
http://www.kvcd.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9439

if you don't want to read all the "conversation", (bla bla blas)
go to the target with ilustrations:
http://home.earthlink.net/~kantack/surround2.htm

believe...amazing results...(ask Kwag about or read all the thread)
my poor english can't explain better than posted there!

complements.....
if you want some "reverberations" effects in mono...
http://sox.sourceforge.net/
take a look:
* Channel averaging, duplication, and removal
* Band-pass filter
* Band-reject filter
* Chorus effect
* DCShift audio
* Deemphases filter
* Move soundstage to front of listener.
* Add an echo or sequence of echos
* Fade in or out
* Apply a flanger effect
* Apply a high-pass filter
* Apply a low-pass filter
* Display a list of loops in a file
* Add masking noise to a signal
* Pan sound between channels
* Apply a phaser effect
* Change the pitch of a sound file without effecting its speed.
* Change sampling rates using several different algorithms.
* Apply a reverb effect
* Reverse sound samples (to search for Satanic messages)
* Detect periods of silence and start and stop processing based on it
* Change the speed of samples being played (without effecting pitch)
* Display general stats on sound samples
* Stretch/shorten the duration of a sound file.
* Swap stereo channels
* Create sounds with a simple synthesizer
* Trim audio data from beginning and end of file.
* Add the world-famous Fender Vibro-Champ effect
* Adjust volume of samples.

and more....

Yep... that's a point.

I don't know why you can't do that.
But I think it will sound better, for sure!

Thanks