I also think 9 for high and 0 for low is a more natural. Lame has a lot of
options, so whoever uses it
would know to use it correctly or at least check the usage file. Besides, it
seems to me that lame is al about change.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeremy Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 11:34 PM
Subject: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode
> I disagree. From a functional standpoint, changing an option to cause it
> to do the exact opposite of what it once did is confusing at best, and
> disrupts expected behavior. People upgrading from one release to another
> will find that their "great" sound mp3s will now be horrid, and their
> horrid ones will sound great. A drop-in replacement for lame will do
> different things.
>
> I have no problems with adding new options, but changing existing options
> is a bit rough.
>
> _J
>
> In the new year, Greg Maxwell wrote:
> > On Tue, 1 Feb 2000, Jeremy Hall wrote:
> >
> > > but then you're in conflict with VBR.
> >
> > VBR should be changed. It makes more sence for big numbers to denote
> > bigger bitrate in VBR.
> >
> >
> > --
> > MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
> >
>
> --
> MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
>
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
