Mark Taylor wrote:
> > If someone was encoding 128kbit/sec mp3s from their soundcard (ie from an
> > analog source like a mixer instead of a CD rip) and was okay with these
> > default low pass filter frequencies, should they probably use 32kHz as the
> > sample rate instead of 44.1 kHz? >
>
> If
Alfred Weyers wrote:
> 2) experimentalX=6 (Robert's?) achieves the highest quality (for my
> liking).
Same here, particularly on choral music in a large, cathedral-like acoustic. Less
burble.
John HW
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
Gabriel Bouvigne wrote:
> to my mind, you should remove -d. This switch allows to have different blocks
on the left and on the right, but as it's implemented right now, it requires a
little more bits than without.
Thank you very much for the advice which I shall gladly take.
> * as you're using
Dmitry Boldyrev wrote:
> has anyone experienced problem crashing when enabling
> following flags:
> gfp->allow_diff_short = true;
> gfp->cwlimit=12;
I find that if cwlimit >= ((samplerate / 2) - 0.5) at 128kbit/s,
32kHz sample rate then it segfaults on me. Haven't traced further.
Gentlemen,
I must thank you for the recent improvements to LAME (not to mention
the removal of dependence on ISO source code). We are currently
compiling a "20 year" celebration for the independent classical
record label Hyperion Records and, to make it easy for the compiler
to get the tracks in
Hi,
Hope you don't mind, but Audio Media mag (http://www.audiomedia.com)
have included, in this month's printed edition, my rant about
proprietary streaming audio formats and their potential antidotes.
It includes a link to the LAME pages at http://www.sulaco.org/mp3.
Letter available here: http
e lowpass filter, you've
selected some great default settings. However, I was able to improve the
*perceived* quality by emphasising the treble above 3.5kHz on replay. Can this
sort of pre-emphasis be done, as an option, in the encoding easily, or am I
fooling my hearing?
John Hayward-Warburto
Ross Levis wrote:
> ... his preferences with -X4 & 5 in choral
> music. Maybe you could try the new -X6 option John.
Well... first indication is that -X 6 is not so good on this one particular
choral piece, but it'll have to wait until tonight when I can do some more
serious tests across a vari
Ross Levis wrote:
> What does the -X parameter do exactly?
Only from looking at the code (and not understanding more than half of it...):
It's all in quantize.c (look for references to `experimentalX'). It affects the
output of function quant_compare().
John
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
MP3 ENCODE
out filtering
and sample rates. Now that these facilities are included within LAME,
perhaps the notes are no longer needed? I would say, however, that at
96kbit/s and 32kHz sample rate, choral music in a large reverberant setting
sounds better with --noshort enabled and (even) -m f.
Thanks,
John
7;ve posted some of this Monteverdi test case (in WAV format) at
http://www.bbcradio.demon.co.uk/test.wav if you wanted to try it,
and to see if it's worth adding to your own test cases.
It's 3.5 MB, and lasts around 20 sec.
Thanks again for helping me promote (what I hope is) `good'
; the entire disc) have the preemphasis flag set,
Another example: Hyperion's Schubert Edition compilation, HYP200 (compiled by
my wife) has emphasis on tracks 16 and one other, but none on the rest. The
flag changes as the disc plays to reflect this fact.
John Hayward-Warburton
--
MP3 ENCODER m
Gabriel Bouvigne wrote:
> But those 2 emphasis (C/5) are now obsolete for a lot of years. This flag
> was removed in AAC and mpeg-4.
Quite a few older CDs still have these emphasis flags set. I've just been
assisting with the remastering of a load for a well-known classical label, and
a couple o
an *incredibly* useful tool. If only I could
find a MPEG layer III FAQ to start learning about DSP properly.
John Hayward-Warburton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
14 matches
Mail list logo
