* "Magic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 07 Mar 2000
| Strange that - the Xing MP3 encoder managed to encode the whole of Elgar
| Cello Concert (around 40 minutes of audio) in just under 5 minutes at
| 160kbps. I'm using a P3 450MHz - 64Mb RAM.
The Xing encoder is known to be only slightly better than the ISO reference
implementation. That it, it sounds awful compared to either Fraunhauffer
or LAME.
[...]
| I'm not sure where you got the idea that ATRAC encoding would require more
| CPU power tham MP3 - surely this would depend on how the algo. was
| implemented in the software!
It depends more on the complexity of the algorithms. MPEG-1 Layer III was
designed to be implemented in software; ATRAC was desgined to be
implemented in an ASIC.
| Speed does not always relate directly to the quality of the encoding
| either - one MP3 encoder I had (I forget it's name) took 12 mins to
| encode a 5min tune and the result was audibly worse than Xing at the same
| bitrate which managed it in 15 seconds.
Because the original ISO reference implementation has absolutely no
assembly optimization in it.
| I don't think you can assume the average desktop machine couldn't do it - it
| would be down to how well the software implementation of ATRAC was written,
| and that will depend on how good the programmer is.
The issue is whether or not a desktop machine can handle the large number
of FFTs that the ATRAC ASIC performs in real time. And the fact is,
today's machines cannot. They lack the "hardware acceleration" chipset
that exists in every MD recorder.
--
Rat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> \ Ingredients of Happy Fun Ball include an
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ unknown glowing substance which fell to
PGP Key: at a key server near you! \ Earth, presumably from outer space.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
