It's right that it's not a lot, but I think it's important. As an
example, a standard 10 or 15Hz high pass filter would be nice, as no
one is able to ear such frequencies, so why encoding them?
A 10kHz filter, IMHO, would be a bad idea. Even in poor listening
conditions with less than
What is the purpose of this high-pass filtering ?
You said that it would affect only 2 MDCT coeficients, that is
less than a percent of them all, so what gain do you/we expect from it ?
In the tuning of the 44.1kHz voice option (I know that this option should be
updated now for other
On Thu, Dec 16, 1999 at 08:06:26PM +0100, Gabriel Bouvigne ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote
...
It's right that it's not a lot, but I think it's important. As an
example, a standard 10 or 15Hz high pass filter would be nice, as no
one is able to ear such frequencies, so why encoding them?
A 10kHz
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 23:20:03 -0800
From: Monty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
a frequency resolution of only 22050/576 = 38Hz. So the accuracy of the first
few coefficients is questionable, and a highpass filter at 50Hz would
only effect the first 2 MDCT coefficients. I dont know how big a
Robert Hegemann wrote:
Thank you Ross for the info about radio frequencies.
Coding FM quality with sharp cutoff would look like:
lame --highpass 0.05 --highpass-width 0
...etc
May I make a case for --highpass 0.016 ? FM Radio usually goes down a bit
lower than 50Hz. The lowest note on a
John Hayward-Warburton wrote:
It is true that some FM stations (in the UK at least) put
filters in below
30Hz to allow in-band switching tones to be used between studios.
Not that we use a filter here but I am aware that a lot of stations in the
USA and elsewhere use a highpass filter which
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
What does the -X parameter do exactly?
When LAME searches for a "good" quantization, it has to compare
the actual one with the best one found so far.
The function quant_compare says which one is better, the best
so far or the actual.
Now the -X parameter selects between different approaches
On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Robert Hegemann wrote:
-X4 this is a bit complicated, I think Greg Maxwell should
explain this ;)
-X4 resulted from testing, overthinking and sleep deperivation. :)
It's better if:
The worst subband is less or equal to the masking while the previous
best's
X-Authentication-Warning: cs.csoft.net: $s=geek.rcc.se doesn't match
$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Authentication-Warning: geek.rcc.se: majordom set sender to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f
From: Robert Hegemann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 23:21:56 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender:
Hi Robert.
Hopefully someone else can help with the Win32 compile - please :)
I think Marks suggestion of using a width option may be less confusing and
easier to use.
As far as radio is concerned, the 2 main presets would be something like
this:
1. Music/commercials:
FM50 - 15000
Mark wrote:
I would suggest changing to a more sox like settings, where you specify
the lowpass frequency, and then a width or rolloff parameter.
lowpass_l and lowpass_h seems a little confusing. What about:
--lowpass
--lowpass_width
And then there could be a default width of about
12 matches
Mail list logo
