Don Melton wrote:
> --qual low equivalent to highq=9
> --qual normal " " " 5
> --qual high " " " 2
The idea to create secondary options may be a good way to avoid confusion.
LAME is starting to take off as a quality encoder so the user base is likely to
explode soon. It would be good to get this sorted out ASAP. I still favour a
reversed numbered approach rather than low/normal/high etc to enable far more
flexibility in the future.
> -V3 -b160 -B320
> when it might seem more obvious to do this:
> --vbr 192 --min 160 -max 320
I don't think this can work. Someone that always encodes classical music, for
example, would find the average bitrate is nothing like someone who always
encodes rock. It would be too confusing. For your example I still prefer
"--vbr 6".
My thoughts are wandering too far here but: it would be possible to use your
format if the resulting average was forced to be close to the selected
bitrate. This would take an extra dummy encoding pass through the file to
establish which -V setting to use and then encode it. I suspect this would be
possible but I don't know how useful it would be.
Ross.
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
