I should have added that I am using the switches -b 32 -B 320
Ross.
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
Unfortunately I'm running Windows rather than Linux. I will take that plunge once it
is more configuration user-friendly. The -V4 switch in v3.57 (without -v which
doesn't appear to be required). I noticed that prior Lame versions required -V5 to
average close to 128kb/s whereas -V4 is now
On Sun, 5 Dec 1999, Ross Levis wrote:
Unfortunately I'm running Windows rather than Linux. I will take that plunge once
it is more configuration user-friendly. The -V4 switch in v3.57 (without -v which
doesn't appear to be required). I noticed that prior Lame versions required -V5 to
how does xing vbr compare to lame, in quality?
- Original Message -
From: "Greg Maxwell" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, December 04, 1999 11:59 PM
Subject: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Re: VBR not as variable as Xing
On Sun, 5 Dec 1999,
Ampex wrote:
how does xing vbr compare to lame, in quality?
I don't have the equipment to do high quality listening tests but other tests have
shown Lame to be better than the Xing encoder. I found Xing better than Fhg for
joint-stereo distortion.
Greg Maxwell wrote:
If the cutoff is
