Rolf Hanich wrote:
>
> About quality:
> I tried Lame mainly because Audioactive (they licensed the Fraunhofer
> codec), while really good w. most music sources, was unable to encode
> one tune I cut from MTV (Oh Carolina) in that it ran over it twice as
> fast and produced something sounding like 56kbps. I also noticed some
> warbling behind vocals from clear CD sources at 128k. None of these
> problems occured w. Blade and Lame, same bitrate. I couldn't get to
> hear any difference to CD w. lame 3.32 at 128kbps and VBR on, at least
> w. the music sources I have. So I can't verify how the improvements of
> the later versions really are.
There is such thing as phase shift between two channels. You are always
getting it while recording from an audiocassete, or from any other audio
tape, from some CDs, etc. That's there JointStereo does Bad Thing. We
are loosing too many important information in side channel in this case.
But there is no JointStereo in Blade. And Lame (afaik) makes a check,
if using JS will harm quality or not. For each frame. If it's not
right, correct me.
PS. I've wrote an MP3 overview (~50k) covering general things about MP3,
some of them are like this :). Unfortunately, it's only in Russian now.
If Gabriel Bouvigne thinks it ( in it's _present_ state ) worths
translating, maybe...
Have a nice day!
Mikhail
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
