> People will select > the quality based not on what features are enabled/disabled > (which is unimportant, really) but on what their perceived > gain will be: > 0 = lowest quality, regardless of actual implementation > 9 = highest quality > If we add something that improves quality over the current > 9-best quality then that will make the new option 9-best > quality and the old 9 will move to 8. Exactly! That's the first really sensible thing I've heard on this subject. If quality improves dramaticly, it should not be activated with a -quality 10 or actually, a -quality 0, but the better quality should be provided using the same 'use best quality' setting from previous versions, namely -quality 1 or -quality 9, whatever is decided, even if this makes lame run a little slower. Just my two cents, Ivo -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Robert Hegemann
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Jeremy Hall
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Christopher Wise
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Greg Maxwell
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Jeremy Hall
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Greg Maxwell
- Re: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq ... Robert Hegemann
- Re: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq ... Greg Maxwell
- RE: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Ross Levis
- RE: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Stapp, Acy
- Re: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Ivo van Heel
- Re: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Cavallo de Cavallis
- Re[3]: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Joerg Hevers
- Re: Re[3]: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Greg Maxwell
- Re: Re[3]: [MP3 ENCODER] highq m... Paul Hartman
- Re: Re[3]: [MP3 ENCODER] hig... Jose Mejuto
- Re: Re[3]: [MP3 ENCODER] highq m... Mathew Hendry
- Re: Re[3]: [MP3 ENCODER] hig... Paul Hartman
- Re: Re[3]: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Monty
- [MP3 ENCODER] Re: highq mode T.B.
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Re: highq mode Cavallo de Cavallis
