Hi all,
> GB> Btw, according to the gogo page, Lame can be twice as fast as it
> GB> is using asm.
> But then it will loose the portability at least among the non-ix86
> systems.
I think a few ASM routines will be OK as long as they are pretty modular.
For example, an x86 ASM FFT would be ni
>
> > FhG faster than Xing? It seems strange.
>
> Not only faster, but better quality, in the limited tests I've done.
> Castanets is is very noticably distorted by Xing at 128kbps, but even in
> "Fast"
> mode FhG does well. It's not transparent even at "Highest" quality, but it's
> damned close
28.09.1999 at 13:54:12 you wrote to me:
GB> Btw, according to the gogo page, Lame can be twice as fast as it
GB> is using asm.
But then it will loose the portability at least among the non-ix86
systems.
---
Sergey A. Maslyakov
2:5030/1024@fidonet
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.r
From: Gabriel Bouvigne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> FhG faster than Xing? It seems strange.
Not only faster, but better quality, in the limited tests I've done.
Castanets is is very noticably distorted by Xing at 128kbps, but even in
"Fast"
mode FhG does well. It's not transparent even at "Highest" qu
: mardi 28 septembre 1999 15:46
Objet : RE: [MP3 ENCODER] New (FAST!) FhG MP3 encoder with VBR support
> > "Fast" is suspiciously fast - Xing fast you might say.
> Faster than xing on my box.
> Encoding my standard 150 second file takes less than 60 seconds with nero
(fast
On Tue, 28 Sep 1999, Sergey A. Maslyakov wrote:
> By the way, it would be a great idea to make LAME being able to run
> on all processors of SMP system
If you are encoding multiple tracks at a time, you can call multiple
instances of LAME (this is what Grip does). Trying to parallelize LAME
WEll... dual channel stereo modes might be trivially paralelisable
Dunno about anything else.
Scott Manley (aka Szyzyg) /-- _@/ Mail -\
___ _ _ __ __ _ | Armagh Observatory |
/ __| __ ___| |_| |_ | \/ |__ _ _ _ | |___ _
> "Fast" is suspiciously fast - Xing fast you might say.
Faster than xing on my box.
Encoding my standard 150 second file takes less than 60 seconds with nero (fast
mode).
Xing(linux) takes abou 110 seconds
(p166 RH6.0)
later
mike
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
hi
>the site talks about the "brandnew and ultrafast MP3-Encoder of Fraunhofer".
>but neither fraunhofer or opticom mention any updates to the encoding engine.
>Probably using the same old codec that everyone else on windows uses.
the old codec sometimes produced obvious flanging artifacts (JS
From: Jake Hamby [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> results. As for speed, the "fast" setting is very fast (4
> sec. for a 30
> sec. clip), "medium" is slower then LAME (23 sec. vs. <7 sec.
> for LAME), and
> "highest" is very slow (didn't time it, but about 2 minutes).
"Fast" is suspiciously fast -
27.09.1999 at 23:44:06 you wrote to me:
mcc> It does say something about "30 times" the speed. but that may be
mcc> on a quad-athlon 800Mhz computer..
By the way, it would be a great idea to make LAME being able to run
on all processors of SMP system. But, I guess, such an idea would
requir
> > AFAICT, only currently available as part of "Nero", Win9x/NT CD-R
burning
> > software. Demo available at
> > http://www.ahead.de
>
> the site talks about the "brandnew and ultrafast MP3-Encoder of
Fraunhofer".
> but neither fraunhofer or opticom mention any updates to the encoding
engine.
> P
hi all
> AFAICT, only currently available as part of "Nero", Win9x/NT CD-R burning
> software. Demo available at
> http://www.ahead.de
the site talks about the "brandnew and ultrafast MP3-Encoder of Fraunhofer".
but neither fraunhofer or opticom mention any updates to the encoding engine.
Prob
> AFAICT, only currently available as part of "Nero", Win9x/NT CD-R burning
> software. Demo available at
>
> http://www.ahead.de
>
> Haven't tried it get, waiting for the download...
Okay, I downloaded it, and installed it, and after removing NeroCdNt.sys
which crashed my 2000 installation, I tr
14 matches
Mail list logo