Acoustica-Spam: Spam Score: 4.7
Spam Report:
SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ----------------------
SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered
SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future.
SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
SPAM:
SPAM: Content analysis details: (4.70 hits, 5 required)
SPAM: FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS (0.9 points) From: ends in numbers
SPAM: FORGED_RCVD_FOUND (0.8 points) Possibly-forged 'Received:' header found
SPAM: SPAM_PHRASE_01_02 (0.5 points) BODY: Spam phrases score is 01 to 02 (low)
SPAM: [score: 1]
SPAM: FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD (1.5 points) Forged hotmail.com 'Received:' header found
SPAM: PRIORITY_NO_NAME (1.0 points) Message has priority setting, but no X-Mailer
SPAM:
SPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results ---------------------
original email follows ---------------------------
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Jun 25 08:56:44 2003
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [131.245.7.145])
by secure.acoustica.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA06889
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 08:56:43 -0700
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
id D1BDE1F58; Thu, 26 Jun 2003 02:01:38 +1000 (EST)
X-Original-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from main.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.224.249])
by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A27881E2D
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Thu, 26 Jun 2003 02:01:32 +1000 (EST)
Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 19VCfM-00055P-00
for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 25 Jun 2003 17:58:36 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Received: from news by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
id 19VCdI-0004tF-00 for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Wed, 25 Jun 2003 17:56:28 +0200
From: "Henrik Andersen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 17:58:53 +0200
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
X-Complaints-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Subject: [mp3encoder] Which AAC encoder: More questions..
X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: MP3 encoders development list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Id: MP3 encoders development list <mp3encoder.minnie.tuhs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder>,
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Archive: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/mp3encoder>
List-Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Subscribe: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder>,
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi
Thank you all for the many responses!
Are all AAC encoders equal when it comes to the sound quality of the encoded
music? With mp3 encoders the sound quality is very different even when
encoded with the same settings (bit rate etc.)
Thanks in advance!
_______________________________________________
mp3encoder mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
_______________________________________________
mp3encoder mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
