I'm using EAC/LAME 3.92.

I've traditionally made the choice to compromise on the sound in order to
save space: 'alt-preset standard' is just too big a filesize for my uses.
At the moment I'm using 'alt-preset 144[or 160] -b96' as a compromise to
retain a smaller filesize.  With that goal in mind, are there any better
encoding option choices?

Is it worth putting in a feature request for something like an 'alt-preset
low' - something that goes for a smaller filesize, but does everything smart
like 'standard' does?  I'm not sure if I'm alone in such a market...  Does
the 'standard' methodology allow resolution scaling like that, or does it
use heuristics that don't scale like that?  Just curious - I'm ignorant
about the innards.

One aspect I'm wondering about with my current choice is that it doesn't
seem to take a 'global' look at the file: say the middle section is very
quiet and sparse, the 'alt-preset NNN' doesn't seem to decide it could use
the unneeded space from there on the busier parts elsewhere - it just varies
the resolution on a very whort time scale.  (Heck, I don't even know if
'standard' does that, but I was assuming it did.)

Anyway, I'm just looking for the best choice for my constraints.
--
Vincent Kargatis
np: Burkhard Stangl - "Teint"  (R�cital)


_______________________________________________
mp3encoder mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder

Reply via email to