>> > constant bitrate:
>> > Fraunhofer, lame, Xing, (long pause) bladeenc
>> so blade is so shitty ? doh i have used it for a while, btw at 160, probably
>> better than xing @128 i used before
>
>Comparing blade at 160 with Xing at 128 is like comparing warm pepsi to
>cold coke.
But isen't it a bit unfair to compare it at 96 when Blade always encode stereo with no
band-21 cutoff, and no and all the others joint stereo with band-21 cutoff ?
Peter
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
