Re: Re[4]: [MP3 ENCODER] RazorLame 1.1.0 released

2000-09-04 Thread Gabriel Bouvigne

> perhaps it is time for someone who fully
> understands all the options/switches to settle down and write a
> comprehensive  'Help' file for Lame, - I doubt many who use Lame with a
> front-end or ripping utility bother to read the 'Usage' file that
> accompanies the exe file and I don't think users of the dll file even see
> it.

I'm trying to do it in the html doc. I plan to add to it a page about the
basic options because there are now too much ones in the full switches page.
If you've got any suggestion about the html doc, please share them.

Regards,


--

Gabriel Bouvigne - France
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
icq: 12138873

MP3' Tech: www.mp3-tech.org


--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )



Re: Re[4]: [MP3 ENCODER] RazorLame 1.1.0 released

2000-09-03 Thread Eric Howgate

- Original Message -
From: Holger Dors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Roel VdB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 01, 2000 12:01 PM
Subject: Re[4]: [MP3 ENCODER] RazorLame 1.1.0 released


> Hello Roel,
>
> > 30 options in 1 screen are less complicated than 30 options scattered
> > over 5 screens.
> This can probably be disputed for very long!
>
>
> > - 1 screen (oversight & clarity)
> > - in top, a (greyed out or so) continuous display of current command
> > line.  I never understood why enabling this is an option.
> > - only a limited set of "core" options. stereo mode, bitrate, encoder
> > mode, delete after, and the most common flags.  Just so you have a nice
oversight of
> > options.
> > - a box to add non-common command line options.
> > - a flag to make lame only use that box, instead of adding the content
> > to current selected options.
> The problem starts with the "most common flags". Who will define
> those? You've left out VBR, for a start. Similar, I know at least one
> person who was very happy about that the "Audio Processing" tab where
> you can set sampling frequency and filter options.
>
> Personally, I started RL because of the many options Lame has to
> offer, it's fun to play with them, and I wanted an easy interface. I
> admit that the options dialog is far from being perfect, but I think
> it's a good start.
>
>
> > then, why no multithread? it'd be nice to update the to-be-encoded
> > list in one window while the encoding-box is somewhere else...
> Actually, this is on my wish list. However, unlike LAME, I'm currently
> the only programmer in RazorLame (I hope this changes soon!), and the
> wishlist grows and grows. Additional, I do this in my spare time, so
> please be patient.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>   Holger Dors   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
Perhaps the 'disputants' might care to take a look at a new front end for
Lame, available from
http://www.geocities.com/enlamer/

This has many of Lame's options in the one large user dialog, but I suspect
it will confuse the novice user (and it seems to be able to handle only
single files at present);  perhaps it is time for someone who fully
understands all the options/switches to settle down and write a
comprehensive  'Help' file for Lame, - I doubt many who use Lame with a
front-end or ripping utility bother to read the 'Usage' file that
accompanies the exe file and I don't think users of the dll file even see
it.

Roel's site is certainly a good guide for achieving optimal performance with
music - but there are other uses, eg voice recording, not touched on there,
and only barely mentioned in the 'Usage'  file.

Eric







--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )



Re[4]: [MP3 ENCODER] RazorLame 1.1.0 released

2000-09-01 Thread Holger Dors

Hello Roel,

> 30 options in 1 screen are less complicated than 30 options scattered
> over 5 screens.
This can probably be disputed for very long!


> - 1 screen (oversight & clarity)
> - in top, a (greyed out or so) continuous display of current command
> line.  I never understood why enabling this is an option.
> - only a limited set of "core" options. stereo mode, bitrate, encoder
> mode, delete after, and the most common flags.  Just so you have a nice oversight of
> options.
> - a box to add non-common command line options.
> - a flag to make lame only use that box, instead of adding the content
> to current selected options.
The problem starts with the "most common flags". Who will define
those? You've left out VBR, for a start. Similar, I know at least one
person who was very happy about that the "Audio Processing" tab where
you can set sampling frequency and filter options.

Personally, I started RL because of the many options Lame has to
offer, it's fun to play with them, and I wanted an easy interface. I
admit that the options dialog is far from being perfect, but I think
it's a good start.


> then, why no multithread? it'd be nice to update the to-be-encoded
> list in one window while the encoding-box is somewhere else...
Actually, this is on my wish list. However, unlike LAME, I'm currently
the only programmer in RazorLame (I hope this changes soon!), and the
wishlist grows and grows. Additional, I do this in my spare time, so
please be patient.



Regards,
  Holger Dors   mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )