Two MAD Decoder problems

[Supra107]

So, when I use MAD Decoder, the sound is too loud. And the other worse problem is that when I try to play an Internet stream, Winamp stops responding. The second one is the worst. Is there a way to fix it or is it completely MAD Decoder's fault? :|

[Aminifu]

I would blame the 3rd party decoder. How old is version you are using? Older than the Winamp or OS versions you're using?

[DrO]

in_mp3 is used for a lot of Winamp's streaming handling and so unless the 3rd party plug-in replicates that then things will generally not work right. and the in_mad plug-in breaks a lot of other things when used with a Winamp release in the last 8 years. so is probably best to not use it and stick with the default in_mp3.

[Supra107]

Darn... It's pretty sad that there's no Winamp decoder plugin which has high quality sound. Oh well...

[Aminifu]

Hi Supra107,

I only have 6,378 files in my collection (mostly mp3s). I have not experienced any quality problems with the current Winamp decoders that were not the direct result of the encoded file's quality or low computer resources due to running several other major apps at the same time.

What quality issues are you having, in which formats?

I can get a file to sound differently (better or worse) by applying various equalizer and/or DSP effects, but this is not caused by poor quality decoding, imo. With adjustments, I can get a file to sound nearly the same (to my ears) in Winamp as it does in other apps. But I can usually get it to sound best in Winamp.

Some people don't want to adjust anything. They will never know what they might be missing.

The rest of the system (soundcard or soundchip, amp, and speakers or headphones) makes a big difference too.

[Supra107]

Well, people say that it has higher audio output quality than the default decoder. Anyway, why do I want to change it? If it ain't broken, don't fix it, as they say. I always want the best stuff. :/

[DrO]

people also said the moon was made from green cheese and that the world was flat.

if you think in_mad is better for you, use it, but you then have to deal with the compromises / issues it will cause your Winamp install. and I know some Winamp users swear by in_mad and other alternative MP3 decoder plug-ins but there has never been any true data provided to prove it (AB testing, etc), just that "it sounds better to me".

any differences in output are generally going to be due to post-processing on the MP3 audio i.e. EQs or how the plug-in gets the data into the format that the player requires. as such, there is negligible difference in the 'quality' of the output from the same input data (such as noted from http://www.foobar2000.org/FAQ#does_f..._other_players). and all of this has been covered to death ad-infinitum over the years (with it popping up it's ugly head every few years) as you cannot magically create more 'quality' from the same input data (especially with MP3 when you've already lost so much of the audio data).

[Aminifu]

People still say or people said in the past? Does your direct experience prove out what people say/said about this? If not, why repeat what others say like it is your own statement?

Things like this are testable (and highly subjective). It's better to test for yourself before you believe what you read or hear.

[DrO]

i was jsut using it as a point that just blindly following what others say (and I appreciate the irony of my reply) about the super wonderful massive quality improvement without actually doing research is about as useful as thinking the moon is made of cheese or the crazy 'improvements' $1000 audio cables are meant to do despite still working on the same digital data.

if Supra107 wants to use the plug-in then so be it as maybe it is better for that specific setup. it's just that blindly believing things without actually trying (as I've tried in_mad in the past and other MP3 plug-ins and the only difference I ever heard was due to EQ processing being applied).

so maybe i'm the one not able to hear the difference and am wrong. though I don't hear a difference between Winamp, VLC, WMP and fb2k either when all of the EQ stuff is turned off and output levels are set the same.

[Aminifu]

Hi DrO,

My reply was to Supra107, not to your comments (which I agree with). You once again got your post in before mine (it wasn't there when I started to write my response).

[Benski]

in_mad produces slightly more distorted output compared with Winamp's built-in decoder, although these results are hundreds of times quieter than the noise of your amplifier when in 24 bit. In 16 bit mode, in_mad fails miserably in quality, and does not meet the criteria set by the MP3 spec. You need to stick with the default decoder if you want the best sound quality.

This was based on performing a "compliance test", part of the MP3 specification. It compares results from decoded a specially-created MP3 file that produces a known correct output that can be compared. You can see the results I posted 7 years ago -
http://www.hydrogenaud.io/forums/ind...howtopic=64098