That's great! I've been waiting for these settings. Can someone please
compile a Win32 version. Maybe a new beta version should be released?
Ross.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Robert Hegemann
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 1999
Ross wrote:
> That's great! I've been waiting for these settings. Can someone please
> compile a Win32 version. Maybe a new beta version should be released?
>
> Ross.
Hi Ross,
I have no Windows, so I can't help you with a Win32 version.
But I want to start a collection, that could become som
> 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
>
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 hz
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
Robert,
Presets: Is the -b setting removed when -v is selected? Should!
If you are interested, I've just analysed some voice-only files here and
found most energy is between 100hz and 12000hz.
Cheers,
Ross.
Robert Hegemann wrote:
> Thank you Ross for the info about radio frequencies.
> Coding
At 5:28 PM +0100 on 12/13/99, Robert Hegemann wrote:
> CD 2 - 2 hz, stereo:
> --lowpass_h 2
> --resample 44.1
> -m s -b 192
I thaught a CD could have up to 22KHz?
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
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 whic
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
> 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 t
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
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
>
> 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
> 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 problem
> this is, but a true 50Hz filter would need to be done before
> ca
> 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
> > No practical filter, digital included, will have a cutoff that sharp. It
> > *could*, but that causes all sorts of other problems (like serious ringing
> > throughout the spectrum).
>
> Are there any rules of thumb for an appropriate frequency range that
> the filter should act on?
Depends
From: Mark Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Just a note on the highpass filter: at 44.1khz sampling rate,
>we only have 576 MDCT coefficients on which the filter acts and thus
>a frequency resolution of only 22050/576 = 38Hz. So the accuracy of the first
>few coefficients is questionable, and a hig
David Balazic wrote:
> From: Mark Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >Just a note on the highpass filter: at 44.1khz sampling rate,
> >we only have 576 MDCT coefficients on which the filter acts and thus
> >a frequency resolution of only 22050/576 = 38Hz. So the accuracy of the first
> >few coeffi
> 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 bitrat
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 10kH
> > 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 les
On Sat, Dec 18, 1999 at 02:19:29PM +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?
>
22 matches
Mail list logo
