>
> RE:
> http://www.kenwoodcorp.com/i/topframes/press_sdrive_2620.html
>
> Any comments?
>
> --
> Dmitry Boldyrev
> Subband Software, Inc.
> http://www.subband.com
>
>
This just made it into slashdot. They also seem to not know
what is going on, but maybe some of the feedback will
I wrote-
>>I suspected that long blocks would also have better frequency resolution
>> than short blocks (by a factor of 3).
Monty wrote-
>Yep, that's exactly it; better frequency resolution means better energy
>compaction of strong tones so that they're generally represented in finer
>resolut
On Sun, 25 Jun 2000, Monty wrote:
>
> > Eeek. Not a way to show off, Monty. I put in 3 more minutes of work beyond
> > the short block hack:
> >
> > http://linuxpower.cx/~greg/logs.ogg
>
> OK, I replaced mine. But I was *just* illustrating the effect of that one bug.
> I'm not *trying* to sho
> Eeek. Not a way to show off, Monty. I put in 3 more minutes of work beyond
> the short block hack:
>
> http://linuxpower.cx/~greg/logs.ogg
OK, I replaced mine. But I was *just* illustrating the effect of that one bug.
I'm not *trying* to show off... "We're all engineers here. Except for t
On Fri, 23 Jun 2000, Monty wrote:
[snip]
> For comparison purposes, here's the same sample with short blocks disabled (and
> a less lossy codebook set):
>
> http://www.xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/test.ogg
[snip]
Eeek. Not a way to show off, Monty. I put in 3 more minutes of work beyond
the short block
> Hi everyone.
> Just a quick question...
>
> I know that short blocks require more bits to encode than long blocks, but
> is that the only drawback with using short blocks? I suspected that long
> blocks would also have better frequency resolution than short blocks (by a
> factor of 3).
Yep, th
Hi everyone.
Just a quick question...
I know that short blocks require more bits to encode than long blocks, but
is that the only drawback with using short blocks? I suspected that long
blocks would also have better frequency resolution than short blocks (by a
factor of 3).
Thx
Shawn
--
MP3 ENCO
Hi. I have a couple of my own questions about this.
It sounds like what's being referred to as "ABR" would be not only faster,
but more reliable (in quality terms) than the traditional VBR. So what's
the use of traditional VBR now?
Could Lame be changed to set "ABR" quality using the standard "-
I guess ID3v2 tag doesn't cause any conflict anywhere... Does it? Is it
possible to keep both version of tags? Then, the programs which do not
support v2 may read the v1 tag... But I guess that'll confuse most of the
players [if not all of them!] because they probably are not specifically
programm
I thinbk the point is tha in standard http streaming ,you can insert an
ID3V2 tag at the start of the stream and have title data displayed - even
if you're streaming static files from apacghe.
Scott Manley (aka Szyzyg) /-- _@/ Mail -\
___ _ _ __ _
>> Why add version 2 tags at all? Version 1 tags are virtually useless
>> within streaming audio (since they don't appear until the end of the
>> stream), so version 2 tag support is essential for that type of
>> application.
>Not really. Take a look at my streaming MP3 station on Live365 at
>ht
Not really. Take a look at my streaming MP3 station on Live365 at
http://www.live365.com/cgi-bin/directory.cgi?autostart=wtgfs
and you'll see the info from the ID3 version 1 tags for all clips.
The server, which of course runs much faster than the internet
connection, simply reads the ID3 Version
On Sun, Jun 25, 2000 at 11:33:20AM +0200, Gabriel Bouvigne wrote:
> > So ... comments? Does anyone not want this feature? How about a
> > different behavior? Or should I just start typing away now? :-)
>
> I personnally don't use the lame id3 options. But, personnally, I'd like to
> have by de
> So ... comments? Does anyone not want this feature? How about a
> different behavior? Or should I just start typing away now? :-)
>
I personnally don't use the lame id3 options. But, personnally, I'd like to
have by default both v1 and v2 tags if v2 are necessarry (ie more than 30
char), as
Gang,
I have a proposal for adding ID3 version 2 tag support to LAME. Why?
Well, someone asked about it on the mailing list several weeks ago and I
was bored and just wanted to make a contribution again. :-)
Actually, since version 2 tags are normally the first frame of an MPEG
audio stream, it
15 matches
Mail list logo
