Hi Frank,
>
> 1. FFT filters are strictly speaking no filters (they are not a LTI system),
>so they have some nasty properties, which are more or less audible. The
>audibility depends on the steepness of the filter. So high passes should
>never be made by FFT filters. Never ever.
>
Hi Mark,
:: A couple of comments/questions:
:: >
:: > :: Also, every transition from two different size windows is lossy. The
:: > :: MDCT is only lossless for overlapping windows of the same size.
:: > ::
:: > Is this a problem of bad designed (asymmetric) window functions or a
:: >
Hi Frank,
A couple of comments/questiosn:
>
> :: Also, every transition from two different size windows is lossy. The
> :: MDCT is only lossless for overlapping windows of the same size.
> ::
> Is this a problem of bad designed (asymmetric) window functions or a
> problem of the MDCT (differ
Frank Klemm wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 10:24:58AM -0600, Mark Taylor wrote:
> >
> > There is one thing I would like to do, but the work in LAME
> > seems to never end :-) A variant on MP3 which
> > uses everything from LAME, but with the following changes:
> >
>
> I would not call it M
Gabriel Bouvigne wrote:
>
> > how about altering some of the mp3 specs themselves and creating a
> lame
> > specific mp3 variant?
> > are there any legal reasons not to do this? would the quality gain
> be
> > worth the effort?
> The problem is that no player would them be able to play the files.
::
:: >
:: > > 1. go to transform sizes 1024 and 128
:: > >
:: > MP3 uses 576 and 192. When 576 is too low for tonal music and 192 too long for
:: > percussions, then this is right. But a 1:8 ratio can create other problems.
:: > Note that MD uses 128, 256, 512 and 1024 sample blocks.
::
>
> > 1. go to transform sizes 1024 and 128
> >
> MP3 uses 576 and 192. When 576 is too low for tonal music and 192 too long for
> percussions, then this is right. But a 1:8 ratio can create other problems.
> Note that MD uses 128, 256, 512 and 1024 sample blocks.
> Useful are block sizes from
On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 10:24:58AM -0600, Mark Taylor wrote:
>
> There is one thing I would like to do, but the work in LAME
> seems to never end :-) A variant on MP3 which
> uses everything from LAME, but with the following changes:
>
I would not call it MP3. A distinguished name (MP4 or MPEG
>
> > how about altering some of the mp3 specs themselves and creating a lame
> > specific mp3 variant?
> > are there any legal reasons not to do this? would the quality gain be
> > worth the effort?
>
> The problem is that no player would them be able to play the files. MP3 is
> an internation
> how about altering some of the mp3 specs
themselves and creating a lame> specific mp3 variant?> are there
any legal reasons not to do this? would the quality gain be> worth the
effort?
The problem is that no player would them be able to
play the files. MP3 is an internationnal standard, an
sorry about the repeat messages but when I wrote them I was very tired
and my brain was at half-power, an particular alterations I would like
to see would be the ability to use larger than 320 kbps bitrates and vbr
and abr (abr 320)
I think i got everything this time, thanx for your time
--
MP3 EN
how about altering some of the mp3 specs themselves and creating a lame
specific mp3 variant?
are there any legal reasons not to do this? would the quality gain be
worth the effort?
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
Mark Taylor wrote:
> > - An engine which would analyze the source data and find out which mode
> > for -X would be best to use for compression (I have to admit though, that I
> > am not too familiar with the -Xx settings - if someone could please explain
> > these modes (or point me to a document
> Hi,
>
> I got some suggestions for LAME. They're not too complicated (probably are
> to implement, though), so here goes:
>
> - LAME VBR doesn't encode the LSB (Least Significant Bit) correctly (as
> described on http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~djmrob/mp3decoders/lsb.html) -
> what exactly is
Youri Pepplinkhuizen schrieb am Mit, 20 Sep 2000:
> Hi,
>
> I got some suggestions for LAME. They're not too complicated (probably are
> to implement, though), so here goes:
>
> - LAME VBR doesn't encode the LSB (Least Significant Bit) correctly (as
> described on http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~
Hi,
I got some suggestions for LAME. They're not too complicated (probably are
to implement, though), so here goes:
- LAME VBR doesn't encode the LSB (Least Significant Bit) correctly (as
described on http://privatewww.essex.ac.uk/~djmrob/mp3decoders/lsb.html) -
what exactly is causing this and
16 matches
Mail list logo
