Mark Taylor schrieb am Mon, 10 Jul 2000: > -F: Not recommended. This was added to force a > minimum frame size even if the data > could fit in a smaller framesize. -F was added because > some obscure portable couldn't handle frames < 64kbs. > Originally -F had no impact on the amount of data actually > used to encode the frame, but Robert may have since changed > this. The -F has no influence on the amount of bits used. Using it will still waste a lot of bits at silent tunes. Robert -- MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Mark Taylor
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Ivo
- RE: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Steve Schow
- RE: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Steve Schow
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Mark Taylor
- RE: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Steve Schow
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Don Melton
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code David
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Don Melton
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Mark Taylor
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Robert Hegemann
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Ivo
- Re[2]: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Roel VdB
- RE: Re[2]: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Steve Schow
- Re[4]: [MP3 ENCODER] new VBR code Roel VdB
- [MP3 ENCODER] Lame development matures ..... Roel VdB
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame development mature... Monty
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame development mature... Greg Maxwell
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] Lame development mature... Twinkles
- [MP3 ENCODER] The "-b128" bug i... Roel VdB
- Re: [MP3 ENCODER] The "-b128" b... Robert Hegemann
