Re: [MP3 ENCODER] BladeEnc vs. LAME at high bitrates

[Mikhail]

Hi!

> > Which encoder do you think has the best quality at bitrates over 160?
> >
> Bladeenc is more precise whith High Frequencies. You can hear the
> difference at 192 Kbs as well as 256 Kbs. I don't know at 160, I never
> use it, it sounds too bad.
> Bye
>         Fox

Check this out: 
http://ftpsearch.city.ru/ftpsearch?query=mpegEnc_v007a.zip

Compare it with BladeEnc & Lame at 256/320kbs and please post
here the results. I'll be happy! :)

Most people I know always reported mpegEnc to be better than any other
ISO based mp3 encoder - at higher bitrates. I think it's time to re-test
it. If it is still better then Lame, you have a 'reference' encoder for
developing Lame at higher bitrates...

PS. It is a bit too slow. I'll understand that I mean. :)

Have a nice day!
Mikhail
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )