Hello Joerg,
On 03-Feb-00, you wrote:
> oh one stupid suggestion for the stand alone executable : it could be a good
> idea to allow "| more" or "/page" or "> file.asc" to see the command help,
> now it "goes away" without seein the beginning of it
Simply use a better Computer or at least insta
Felix von Leitner wrote:
> I wonder where the myth that joint stereo would somehow adversely affect
> quality comes from. Was it the web pages from the BladeEnc guy? I
> don't know. Anyway, joint stereo does not make the signal and worse, it
> just allows for a better bandwidth use because on
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000 23:39:10 -, Mathew Hendry wrote:
>BTW, the Linux distribution I have (Mandrake 6.x) uses pgcc (a
>Pentium-specific branch of gcc) as its default compiler. Gives a noticable
>speed improvement for LAME, and I haven't noticed any glitches with it.
>Since pgcc was apparently u
> > oh one stupid suggestion for the stand alone executable : it could be a good idea
>to allow
> > "| more" or "/page" or "> file.asc" to see the command help, now it "goes away"
>without seein
> > the beginning of it
Learn your shell; the output is going to stderr, not stdout. You're only
> From: "Greg Maxwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Can windows users redirect stderr like us poor saps stuck using Free
> Software?
9x users can't. NT users can; and the NT console has scrollback anyway.
I'm currently running a triple boot system (Linux, Win98, Win2k). I might be
tempted to switch t
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000 17:48:15 -0500 (EST), Greg Maxwell wrote:
>On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Joerg Hevers wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> > oh one stupid suggestion for the stand alone executable : it could be a good idea
>to allow
>> > "| more" or "/page" or "> file.asc" to see the command help, now it "goes aw
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Joerg Hevers wrote:
> Hello,
>
> > oh one stupid suggestion for the stand alone executable : it could be a good idea
>to allow
> > "| more" or "/page" or "> file.asc" to see the command help, now it "goes away"
>without seein
> > the beginning of it
> Yes, that would be ver
Hello,
> oh one stupid suggestion for the stand alone executable : it could be a good idea to
>allow
> "| more" or "/page" or "> file.asc" to see the command help, now it "goes away"
>without seein
> the beginning of it
Yes, that would be very useful, especially for Windows where you
cannon scr
Hi all!
There's a problem in the beInitStream function. The parameter info.lay
wasn't getting stuffed.
old code:
stereo = fr_ps.stereo;
error_protection = info.error_protection;
if (info.lay != 3)
{
printf("Only Layer 3 supported\n");
// th
>
> Exactly! That's the first really sensible thing I've heard on this subject.
> If quality improves dramaticly, it should not be activated with a -quality 10
> or actually, a -quality 0, but the better quality should be provided using
> the same 'use best quality' setting from previous versions
> > so blade sucks in such evident way ?
>
> Yes.
> I is like lame without the patches ;)
> Please read the lame changelog, just the patches in the last year
> affecting quality.
Yes but i thought XING was the worst one
Cavallo de Cavallis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
=-=--=--=--=--=-
> Is 160 really high enough to warrant not using joint stereo anymore? I always
> encode with LAME 160 joint stereo, but maybe I should convert :)
Good question, i'd like to know it
anyway i have no idea bout which setting use EAC with DLL, i should ask
to the programmer :/
>
> I agree in that e
At 15:07 03/02/00 +0100, you wrote:
Hi,
I'm trying to use Lame_Enc.DLL. The import of the functions seems to be
good. I can get the version Number. But when I want to call beInitStream
it fails with an error 2. With BladeEnc.DLL all works well. Did anything
change in the structures format, or a
> it prints a warning that one of its packets was missing. In addition to
> the packet transmitted is a packet number. When they are out of sequence
> or missing, the utility whines about it.
I am currently writing a receiver than substitutes the packet with the
closest sequence number instead.
it prints a warning that one of its packets was missing. In addition to
the packet transmitted is a packet number. When they are out of sequence
or missing, the utility whines about it.
_J
In the new year, Felix von Leitner wrote:
> > Your rtp thing probably encodes one frame per packet. My li
> > I agree in that encoding in CBR opposed to VBR gives me a feeling of being
> > more safe :)
> I wonder where the myth that joint stereo would somehow adversely affect
> quality comes from. Was it the web pages from the BladeEnc guy?
Actually, it was this mailinglist. I think Mark Taylor (cor
It is true that joint stereo can give better results, but it is also true
that it is just another algorithum that can go wrong. Look at the LAME
change log for example, there have been some minor bugs in JS.
I think JS got a bad name from Xing and their whacked out implementation.
Xing JS can in
Hi all,
Got a few small patches here to fix warnings and to persuade LAME to compile
under MSVC and Cygwin; they mainly handle cases where BRHIST and HAVEGTK are
not defined. The files affected are
Makefile.MSVC
brhist.c
get_audio.c
lame.c
loopold.c
machine.h
parse.c
psymodel.c
quantize.c
Also,
Hi,
I'm trying to use Lame_Enc.DLL. The import of the
functions seems to be good. I can get the version Number. But when I want to
call beInitStream it fails with an error 2. With BladeEnc.DLL all works well.
Did anything change in the structures format, or anything else ?
Thanks for an
Thus spake Ivo van Heel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Personally, I use LAME 160 stereo for all my encodes, fast and sounds great
> > to me.
> Is 160 really high enough to warrant not using joint stereo anymore? I always
> encode with LAME 160 joint stereo, but maybe I should convert :)
> I agree in t
Thus spake Rolf Hanich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Maybe you should have a look on the new Fraunhofer plugin, as used in Nero.
Sorry, but I cannot test all incarnations of Fraunhofer plugins in the
world. The MusicMatch software is quite recent so I expected the
plugin to be to current version.
> It
> Your rtp thing probably encodes one frame per packet. My little utility
> grabs 1k of data and transmits it.
How does your utility expect the receiver to recover from packet loss?
Felix
PS: I'm out of town until Feb 10 and won't have email in the mean time.
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Ivo van Heel wrote:
> > Personally, I use LAME 160 stereo for all my encodes, fast and sounds great
> > to me.
>
> Is 160 really high enough to warrant not using joint stereo anymore? I always
> encode with LAME 160 joint stereo, but maybe I should convert :)
>
> I agree in
> > so blade sucks in such evident way ?
>
> Yes.
> I is like lame without the patches ;)
> Please read the lame changelog, just the patches in the last year
> affecting quality.
Yes but i thought XING was the worst one
Cavallo de Cavallis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
=-=--=--=--=--=-
> Personally, I use LAME 160 stereo for all my encodes, fast and sounds great
> to me.
Is 160 really high enough to warrant not using joint stereo anymore? I always
encode with LAME 160 joint stereo, but maybe I should convert :)
I agree in that encoding in CBR opposed to VBR gives me a feeling
25 matches
Mail list logo
