> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 12:08:17 +0200
> From: Ivo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > So both ABR 192 and CBR 192 have the same worst case scenario: many
> > frames encoded at around 172kbs. ABR wins in the best case scenario
> > since it will always have extra bits avialable even if the reservoir
> > is empty.
>
> > So I would stick with ABR 192kbs if you are happy with CBR 192kbs.
> > But to guarantee every single frame of an ABR encoding is at
> > least as good as CBR, you would need to use "--abr 211"
> > (192 + 10%)
>
> Wait a second, I don't get this. You just said that both CBR and ABR will do
> most frames at 172kbs (if the bit reservoir is heavily used), so didn't you
> mean to say "to guarantee every single frame of an ABR encoding is at least
> 192kbs you would need to use --abr 211"?
Yep. how about this version:
But to guarantee every single frame of an ABR encoding is at least
as good as the best possible 192 CBR frame, you would need to use "--abr
211" (192 + 10%)
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
