Other Projects > MP3 Checker

MP3 checker vs. MP3 Utility



Here's some feedback on MP3 checker compared to another simillar tool called MP3Utility.

I am not an MP3 expert, so I can only use my ears to decide which tool performs best  ;)

My results so far:

1.) MP3 Checker reports a lot of repeated frames (whatever that may be?!) in some MP3's; but I hear nothing wrong with them. These files are fine according to MP3Utility.

2.) MP3 Checker reports some "Bad MP3"s, but I again I hear nothing wrong with them. These files are fine according to MP3Utility.

3.) MP3Utility reports some "sync errors" in various MP3's. These errors are indeed audible as small hickups or skips in the music. MP3 Checker thinks these files are fine.

It would be helpful if MP3 checker would report at what time (mm::ss) in the MP3 the error occurs, without this information it is hard to be really sure if an MP3 is fine by just listening to it.

Other than that I cannot explain the difference in the results (it seems both tools agree on nothing) and so far my ears agree with MP3Utility,


Some more feedback.

I encoded some mp3's using Foobar v0.9.6 and Lame v398.2 set at 245 V0
I decided to check them for errors using both these utilities and I recieved different results from each.

After scanning the same file with the two utilities these were the results from the two Utilities

MP3 Checker: 19138 frames verified. Invalid frames 5% [10] Repeated frames 14% [9]
MP3Utility: No errors found. 19238 frames processed (0 padded, 10238 unpadded), Bitrate is variable.

So as the two utilites report a different number of frames in the same file and one reports errors while the other does not, the question is, which of the two is the reliable one.

Further update to the previous tests

I now rescanned the same file using a trial version of MP3Test.

This is interesting becuase MP3Test agrees with MP3Utility on the number of mpeg frames in the test subject mp3
MP3Test also agrees with MP3Checker that there is error, but where as MP3Checker reported Invalid frames 5% error, MP3Test only reported 0.04% error.

These are the error check reports by all three programs:

MP3 Checker: 19138 frames verified. Invalid frames 5% [10] Repeated frames 14% [9]
MP3Utility: No errors found. 19238 frames processed (0 padded, 10238 unpadded), Bitrate is variable.
MP3Test: First Frame Invalid.  Resync: 2172 Bytes as 0:00 (0% through).  Frames:19238.  Errors: 1 (0.04%)

I would conclude from these results it is likely that MP3Checker is wrongly caculating the number of frames in the test mp3 (as the other two programs agree on 19238 frames)
I would also conclude that MP3Checker is correctly reporting that there is invalid frame error(s) but only further testing will show whether or not is correct in reporting 5% error, it is unfortunate that MP3Checker does not report which frame(s) it has found to be invalid.
Also with MP3Checker I am unclear as to what the bracket number means : Invalid Frames 5% [10]  is the 10 an error code or the number of frames believed to be invalid ? As 5% of 19238 frames is a lot more than 10 I would be inclined to believe 10 is an error code# but I can't find a description in any documentation to verify this.

Chip hasn't really tinkered with MP3Checker for awhile......
On the Convivea Home page it list the version your probably currently using updated as of 7.22.2006

BitChe, school, and him moving have pretty much absorbed much of his time.......

MP3 Checker was originally designed to help find corrupted mp3 files downloaded on P2P networks flooded with fakes........Now with corrupted MP3's not found as frequently as they were 2-3 yrs ago, I don't know if Chip has any plans to continue tinkering with MP3Checker but who knows.....

Before BitChe, Chips lead application was an awesome add-on program to Kazaa, Then MP3Checker was very relevant.....
2-3+ years ago Kazaa, Limewire, WinMX and etc. had been flooded with fake MP3 files which I believe was the main inspiration to MP3Checker......

With torrents I have never experienced any of those files in my history of torrenting........Maybe I have just been lucky........IDK if the major reason is from simply reading comments posted on the torrent indexing sites or that certain org's have given up their strategy to fight downloading by releasing mass fake files......

Most public torrent sites have downloader comments that help hint out a fake or virus....Private sites are strict with the torrents they allow to be uploaded.......After it has been determined that the file isn't what it should be, the torrent link is deleted from the respective site....Where in the older centralized networks this wasn't as easily as achieved.....If older P2P network users didn't use a dedicated hash/link site, it wasn't as easy to know if the MP3 would be corrupted......Especially since anyone could post a file with no admin or higher up with the ability to take it off the search listings within the respective program search utility.....

Now with his lead application pertaining to the Bittorrent network, I don't think MP3Checker is as relevant to Chip anymore.......
It's also been probly 2 yrs since I P2P frequently enough to notice and easily 4 years since I used networks such as limewire/edonkey/winMX/kazaa frequently

I'm sure Chip will appreciate reading your feedback but
Chip is either lacking internet right now or has been extremely busy because he hasn't been active on the Convivea since December 18TH, 2008........

Maybe when Chip gets some time, he will post a reply to clarify and help your question get answered better than my speculative response have...... :D ;D :D




[0] Message Index

Go to full version