On Fri, 21 Apr 2000, Adam Whitehead wrote:
Hi,
I've made the document available on the web at
http://www.audiophilez.com/layer3.doc
for those who want it.
Probably Adam will do it also, but if you want it in zip (228K):
http://telin.rug.ac.be/~pds/mpeg_audio/xlame/layer3.zip
But
On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For those that care
I do, IMHO layer II is still high(est) quality, high yet nicely
reduced kbps, rel. fast, and, no lots-of-options compression ;)
toolame02f layer II encoder released. Did a little bit of code
cleaning and
Hi,
In fact, it seems to amplify high frequencies...
???
I have a "breathy" sample, after encoding I can
hear the breath better than in the original.
Thanks for help
Gabriel
- Original Message -
From:
Gabriel Gélin
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 20,
In fact, it seems
to amplify high frequencies... ???I
have a "breathy" sample, after encoding I can hear the breath better than
in the original.Thanks for
helpGabriel
The extra "breathiness" seems to be the effect of pre-echo. Encode
it with MP3Enc qual 9 and see if that happens then or not.
Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
At high frequencies, humans only decide direction of the sound by the
relative left/right intensity, not by phase difference.
So this idea seems like the intensity stereo. In this case, why not
implementing intensity stereo?
Regards,
--
Gabriel Bouvigne -
The breath is replaced with many little clicks,
Idon't use VBR but I encode with nQuality 2.
I tried --lowpass but when the clicks disapear,
there is a real decrease of the quality...
Gabriel
- Original Message -
From:
Zia
Mazhar
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday,
Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
At high frequencies, humans only decide direction of the sound by the
relative left/right intensity, not by phase difference.
So this idea seems like the intensity stereo. In this case, why not
implementing intensity stereo?
No, it's totally different
Howdy,
I tried to search through all the messages related to this topic, but I
couldn't find any that addressed the speed issue. Trying VBR using the
lastest 3.8 CVS source, VBR is still slower than CBR. Is this still a
future improvement, or do I need to set an option?
mark stephens
-
MH Are you using Winamp? Its decoder is buggy. Try a Fraunhofer decoder, e.g.
MH l3dec or MS Media Player.
MH -- Mat.
MH --
MH MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
i used winamp AND sonique, both produced
the same errors.
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list (
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
i tried the following test-wav:
it's a sweep from about 20Hz to
20kHz, smoothly increasing the
frequency. FhG encoder did very
well, but with LAME the .mp3 has
audible clicks in it, where the
amplitude is being reduced.
Are you using Winamp? Its
10 matches
Mail list logo
