On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Ross Levis wrote: > But as Gabriel Bouvigne argued, you are limiting best quality to the lowest > number available -- 0. What do you do if a better quality mode is created? > Go negative? :) Shift them all up. Newer lames will be a bit slower for people not taking the best quality. They will find they can use a lower quality without losing quality. :) -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Re: highq mo... Ross Levis
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Pausing outp... Dan Bridges
- [MP3 ENCODER] lame command lin... Ingo Saitz
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] lame command... Mark Taylor
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] lame command... Paul Hartman
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] lame command... Monty
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] lame command... Robert Hegemann
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] lame command... Robert Hegemann
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] lame command... Takehiro Tominaga
- RE: [MP3 ENCODER] highq mode Ross Levis
- Greg Maxwell
