On 17 Sep, Samuel Greear wrote:
The box I'm toying with this on is FreeBSD 4.4, using the LinuxThreads
port.
It should also happen with the native FreeBSD threads. Althought it is
more likely to happen with the LinuxThreads model (for lucky cases of
more likely :-) -- from the -pthread point
a while ago there was some discussion about testing of lame, so that
new errors which are introduced could be spotted early.
i always run make test to see if the result changed at all. which
compiler and options were used to generate testcase.mp3 ?
recently the difference between that
On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, Warren Toomey wrote:
Anyway, please let me know if you have any ideas or complaints. I will
be away all next week at a conference, so I will have less time to read
my e-mail and monitor the list.
I think message size reduction should do, maybe coupled with member-only
All,
I've dropped the max message size on this list down to 10,000 bytes.
Only 28 messages in the last 4,000 were bigger than this limit, so this
should help to keep the spam/viruses out with little extra work for me.
The mail problems at my new work have been rectified, so I am
Hi
i'm new to this mailing list, because i'm using the lame_enc.dll for
automated converting of WAV-files (22050 khz sample rate, Mono,
56kbs) to MP3 files.
I configure BE_CONFIG as Below
memset(config,0,sizeof(config)); // clear all fields
config.dwConfig = BE_CONFIG_LAME;
Read only parts of the structures are no problem, you have just to make
sure, parts which can change multiple times (instead only once at
initialisation) are propperly protected (you didn't want to read from
variables which can't be updated with an atomic operation without a
protection
Koch Tibor wrote:
From: "Warren Toomey" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I could allow only subscribers to post to the list, but I've done this
before on other lists, and I found that people often post from other
e-mail addresses, and that blocks their postings.
Let that be their problem. I think
Dmitry wrote:
Hello David,
Thursday, September 20, 2001, 6:02:22 PM, you wrote:
DB I am strongly against disallowing postings from non-subscribers :
me too!!!
DB Anti spam ideas :
DB - allow only plain text messages, this will kill 99.9 % of spam ( I guesstimate
:-)
too
Hi there
Have you any source examples for converting mono files, didn't work for
me :-((
Thanks in advance
___
Martin GerlachDistributed Systems
phone: +49 (0)221 250-1046mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fax: +49 (0)221
Try my winamp plugin for that (you can automate using playlist :)
http://mukoli.free.fr/out_lame/
The sources are also there.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 6:49 PM
Subject: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] lame_enc.dll - MPEG-2
I thought MPEG-2 layer 3 encodings could not contain a Xing header? AFAIK,
it is only valid for MPEG-1 layer 3.
-Youri
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list archive is at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/mp3encoder%40minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au/
Is anyone willing to take this on? It would be a major leg up on any
other encoder (and I want it bad.) :-)
Bob
Youri Pepplinkhuizen wrote:
Simply put, the encoder would first encode the data to a specific quality
(VBR), without making use of the bit reservoir. Then after those results
LAME puts a Xing header on all VBR encodings (MPEG 1,2 and 2.5).
For CBR, it only uses it if the tag can fit in a frame of the
specified bitrate - this usually rules out MPEG 2.
The tag just contains extra information in the ancillary data
section of a valid layer 3 frame. So it can be
On 20 Sep, Gabriel Bouvigne wrote:
Read only parts of the structures are no problem, you have just to make
sure, parts which can change multiple times (instead only once at
initialisation) are propperly protected (you didn't want to read from
variables which can't be updated with an atomic
Hi,
can someone please comment on it (and if he has commit privs, please
commit it if it is ok)?
One thing I noticed: --with-vorbis should be removed.
Bye,
Alexander.
-- Forwarded message --
Von: Juan Pablo Giménez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: LAME SPEC
On Monday, 17 September 2001 at 17:37, Mark Taylor wrote:
The code related to this reduces to:
offset = x-(floor(x)+.5)
assert(fabs(offset).50001))
so it is either just a precision problem (and then I wonder
why it would be showing up now?) or a rather obscure bug.
I changed it to
BIAS, Inc.
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Sorry if this is covered in a FAQ or archive, but does anyone know if their
is a compiled version of LAME out there, preferably a carbonized shared lib?
Any URLs or hints would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks!
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, the following spilled from the mind of Gabriel Bouvigne:
I will certainly sound harsh to you but I'd even suggest this extreme thing:
Adding a restriction to the Lame licence stating that it's forbidden to make
any change to libmp3lame that would prevent it from adding
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, the following spilled from the mind of Brent Geery:
On-the-fly file splitting. For example, say I have a 2GB wav, and I
wanted the MP3 to be split every 10MB, or whatever. This would also
come in handy if someone is compressing a live stream of data, where
to final MP3
Margaret Clark wrote:
I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
product (or did you pay the legally required licensing fees?), then
bitching, because someone wants to remove the branding. I don't get
it. Sounds like thieves complaining they got robbed.
AFAIK it is
- Original Message -
From: Margaret Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 12:12 AM
Subject: Re: [MP3 ENCODER] clean frames in ancillary data with patch
I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
product (or did you
Hello Margaret,
MC I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
MC product (or did you pay the legally required licensing fees?), then
MC bitching, because someone wants to remove the branding. I don't get
MC it. Sounds like thieves complaining they got robbed.
?? have
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001 00:36:41 +0200 (WEDT), jeremy brand
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can just write your mp3s to stdout. split(1) comes to mind.
(example)
lame foo.wav - | split -b 10485760 - ~/yourdir/tmp/mp3_prefix_
Same goes for input.
cat *.wav | lame - file.mp3
or
cat *.wav | lame
btw Margaret: you're the first woman I see here since ... ever? I'd
always imagined 'first contact' different :))
It really comes as no surprise to me that the first female poster here has
to be a moron. :)
Yes, I'm a sexist. 8)
-Youri
Hello
does anybody know this compiler for Win32
http://www.codeplay.com/index.html ?
may be it produces faster code than icl?
Best regards,
Dmitry mail to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mitiok.cjb.net/
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001 01:26:59 +0200, Roel VdB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MC I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
MC product (or did you pay the legally required licensing fees?), then
MC bitching, because someone wants to remove the branding. I don't get
MC it.
On 18 Okt, Roel VdB wrote:
I got a person using Solaris 8 sparc, gcc 2.95.3, getting core dumps
from LAME:
Writing LAME Tag...Bus Error(coredump)
$ mdb lame390a8 core
Loading modules: [ ]
$c
PutLameVBR+0x4c4(1113c0, cbc5, ffbeda90, 30029b, a05c, 9a)
PutVbrTag+0x68c(63, 30029b, c31e8,
On 21 Okt, J.D. wrote:
Meanwhile, I hope to check out the power-law model patch (that
Alexander posted on Lame-dev) sometime in the next week or two.
Yeah! The first feedback (not counting Robert, he received two
iterations of the patch before I posted the third iteration, but he
hasn't time
On 22 Okt, Gabriel Bouvigne wrote:
Meanwhile, I hope to check out the power-law model patch (that
Alexander posted on Lame-dev) sometime in the next week or two.
Btw, I hope this patch is for 3.91 only and not 3.90, as I'd really like to
see a 3.90 release soon (ie a maximum delay of a few
Hi,
we're talking about converting ReplayGain from GPL to LGPL so it can
be included in LAME:
http://66.96.216.160/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?board=caction=displaynum=1004025520
there are some questions open, so maybe more experienced persons in
this field can answer to David's questions in
On Fri, 26 Oct 2001 16:24:41 +0200, Roel VdB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
we're talking about converting ReplayGain from GPL to LGPL so it can
be included in LAME:
http://66.96.216.160/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?board=caction=displaynum=1004025520
there are some questions open, so maybe more
You can also try vorbis. There is an alpha firmware for the HipZip
which supports vorbis. You can get it from Monty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]).
Cavallo de Cavallis wrote:
i have just bought an mp3 portable device (iomega hipzip, and i
obviously changed earphones) that supports both mp3 and wma.
I discovered lame just a few months ago and am relatively new to it. I
used to use the -q 0 -V 4 options. Up to version 3.90 alpha 7 it
produced results with the bitrate averaging at 190-210 kbps which I
was very glad with. However, with alpha 8 it somehow drastically
changed and even with
On 31 Okt, Roman Korcek wrote:
and thanks for the comments. So as far as I understand, the quality
with VBR and ABR are like curves and CBR is like a line (if you
imagine a graph with x being bitrate from 32 to 320 and y being
quality from worst to best) - with VBR you get the best quality
Hi,
I have just downloaded the LAME source code. Does anybody know if it can
be compiled without the GTK options? All I need is a bare bones encoder
source code.
Thanks
Manoj Palki
You probably downloaded 3.70? Download the latest version (3.89).
Mark
| Odesílatel: Alexander Leidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| On 14 Nov, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Is there a way to decode WMA files with the Lame Encoder/Decoder?
|
| No.
Yes, of course. You need to play WMA via digital loopback (or save to file)
and record+save. Then you can encode to MP3. It is
Hello Jaroslav,
| Odesílatel: Alexander Leidinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| On 14 Nov, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Is there a way to decode WMA files with the Lame Encoder/Decoder?
|
| No.
Yes, of course. You need to play WMA via digital loopback (or save to file)
and record+save. Then you
Howdy Ross,
Hmmm, I guess I wasn't clear that I was asking in terms of my
original stated
project. I'm not about to believe that the effects of MP3
and Ogg Vorbis on
human speech sounds have been studied since the 20's ::-)
I'm not sure why not? While MP3 and Vorbis are products of the
Title: ÉϹØϵͨ£¬½±ÉÌÎñͨ£¡
ÉϹØϵͨ£¬½±ÉÌÎñͨ
Ross Vandegrift wrote:
My goal is not to determine how things sound. See below for more explanation.
By using auditory phonetics. The field of auditory phonetics attempts to
analyze speech sounds as they travel through the air in waveforms. Given
a waveform, one can calulcate a
Well, I pulled LAME from CVS and compiled on RH 7.2 (gcc 2.96) - works
perfectly now.
Thanks,
--
Hetz Ben Hamo
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
the entire redhat 7.2 distribution in compiled with the gcc-2.96.
You can't get much more stable than that.
If you think it has a bug, report it to redhat and
Title: ÉϹØϵͨ£¬½±ÉÌÎñͨ£¡
ÉϹØϵͨ£¬½±ÉÌÎñͨ
On 19 Nov, Christof Damian wrote:
kgcc was egcs-1.1.2 in earlier redhat versions, but I am not sure what
it is in 7.2.
Did anyone try gcc-3.0.x ?
i use gcc-3.0.2 with athlon options, it seems to work allright, but
the make test gives 395 differences.
make test depends on the used
Howdy Ross,
What is this kind of analysis used for, BTW? Automatic
speech recognition?
(I mostly did _speaker_ or voice recognition, so phonemic
identification
wasn't that important to me.)
Well, it's mostly to see if people can safely be lazy with
research sounds.
I was really
Hi,
I would like to know if there is any utility / algorithm by which i can convert from aif format to mp3. Kindly provide the URLs if available
Regards
Sanjog
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from Indiatimes at http://email.indiatimes.comBuy Music, Video, CD-ROM, Audio-Books and Music
On 19 Nov, Robert Hegemann wrote:
Download intels compiler for linux (you have to register, but for
personal use you get it for free and unlimited). I used it here on
FreeBSD to recompile libmp3lame - 20% speed increase (compared against
gcc 2.95.3 on an AMD Duron, I modiefied the Makefile
It really blew my mind when sanjog_jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Hi,
I would like to know if there is any utility / algorithm by which i can convert
from
aif format to mp3. Kindly provide the URLs if available
LAME will do it if you edit the Makefile to compile in support for
Hi,
the current lame doesn't compile with the newer version of nasm (0.98.08)
present in the development version of Mandrake Linux.
Here's the relevant part of the make output:
Making all in i386
make[3]: Wechsel in das Verzeichnis Verzeichnis
»/home/goetz/RPM/BUILD/lame/libmp3lame/i386«
In the last episode (Nov 12), Mitchell said:
I am using the lame encoder to re-encode files for streaming to a
icecast server. I would like to be able to support 33.6 and 56k
modem users so I have chosen 32k as the default encoder bitrate. I
am wundering if it is possible to make the audio
On 29 Sep, bougnax wrote:
Hi I had a SUN SPARC Workstation with Solaris 8.
I can't to compile Lame 3.8.9.
I joined with this e-mail two files when I tried to compile with
make or gmake.
I modify the file Makefile.unix like :
ifeq ($(UNAME),SunOS)
# CC = cc
# CC_OPTS = -O -xCC
#
On Fri, 28 Sep 2001, the following spilled from the mind of Rob Leslie:
jeremy brand wrote:
BTW, in case anyone is interested: this patch is permanatly located here:
http://hackor.com/misc/no_grafiti_frames_lame.diff
You might want to correct the spelling of graffiti.
Rob,
*haha*
haha
j The idea behind this patch is to keep LAME from putting LAME
j name and versions into each frame of the mp3. I know that it
j is nice to have LAME information in frames for debugging and
j testing, but sometimes there is a want to have _clean_ (so to
j
Am Freitag, 28. September 2001 00:56 schrieben Sie:
haha
j The idea behind this patch is to keep LAME from putting LAME
j name and versions into each frame of the mp3. I know that it
j is nice to have LAME information in frames for debugging and
j testing, but
On 26 Sep, ashutosh satish chitnis wrote:
dear sir,
we r trying to convert a wav file of 8kHz, 8 bit,
mono, 7
kbps into mp3 file again back to wave file of same
specifications but it is converting mp3 file into 16
bit
wav file instead of 8 bit, please suggest us a
solution
Hello
I am not sure. I'll default to the lame experts on this. Actually, even
if my patch doesn't get it (which I guess it won't) could someone inform
me of the best _filler_. I figured it didn't matter, because if you can
put LAME x.xx (alpha) in there, then I figured anything could go in
jeremy brand wrote:
BTW, in case anyone is interested: this patch is permanatly located here:
http://hackor.com/misc/no_grafiti_frames_lame.diff
You might want to correct the spelling of graffiti.
--
Rob Leslie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list archive is at:
Hi,
I accidently wrote that you should also use -malign-double as an
optimization flag. However, from my experience, -malign-double can
actually slow the encoding. So, you might want to test and see what effect
it does for you.
Yosi
From: Yosi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
On 25 Nov, Yosi wrote:
I accidently wrote that you should also use -malign-double as an
optimization flag. However, from my experience, -malign-double can
actually slow the encoding. So, you might want to test and see what effect
it does for you.
This depends on the cache size of the CPU
On 24 Nov, Yosi wrote:
Hi Craig,
These are the flags I use when compiling lame. I also use gcc3 which give a
signficant speed improvement over gcc-2.95.
Just do something like this:
CFLAGS=-O6 -fomit-frame-pointer -mcpu=athlon -march=athlon
-malign-functions=4 -funroll-loops
On 28 Nov, Stefan Ohlsson wrote:
[differences with make test]
Is this OK, or should I worry about the quality about the mp3:s made
with this compilation?
It's ok. It depends on the used processor architecture, the used
compiler and the used compiler options. You should only worry if you are
a
On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On 28 Nov, Stefan Ohlsson wrote:
[differences with make test]
Is this OK, or should I worry about the quality about the mp3:s made
with this compilation?
It's ok. It depends on the used processor architecture, the used
compiler and the used compiler
| Odesílatel: Heribert Maier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| Recently, I decided to burn audio CDs decoding them with lame.
| Unfortunately the resulting wav-files cannot be burned on CD as they
| are single-channel-files. Neither EAC nor Feurio are willing to burn
| them.
| 2) If the answer to question 1)
Hi Brent!
On Wed, 03 Oct 2001, Brent Geery wrote:
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001 01:26:59 +0200, Roel VdB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
MC I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
MC product (or did you pay the legally required licensing fees?), then
MC bitching, because someone
Hi Alexander!
On Thu, 04 Oct 2001, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
On 3 Okt, Brent Geery wrote:
I just want to clarify some facts.
there is nothing illegal about the whole LAME project. FhG put out
ISO sources as a guideline, which can be modified legally.
I'm not talking about the
Hi Dmitry!
On Thu, 04 Oct 2001, Dmitry wrote:
Hello Alexander,
Thursday, October 04, 2001, 11:50:42 AM, you wrote:
AL I didn't like it, it gives the LAME project a bad smell.
hm... if 'bad guy' like lame, then lame has a bad smell...
if somebody kills someone using a pen lets stop
Hi Ross!
On Fri, 05 Oct 2001, Ross Levis wrote:
jeremy brand wrote:
It is quite offensive when people on this list all guess my intentions for
writing such a patch. Nobody has got it right yet, even after I told this
list my intentions in some of the first few emails on this thread.
|No, contrary to this belief, all that is needed is to
| contact each and everyone of the people ever involved in the
| project, to agree for a change of the license. Then of course,
| all versions before retain their GPL status, but not those
| following. (This procedure can also be used to
Michel SUCH [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I find that the latest 3.90 alphas are very stable and produice very
high quality result.
I'm sorry if this is a stupid question (although - I'd remember someone
saying, that there is no stupid questions, only stupid people ;-), but
where can I find newer
On 6 Okt, Artemis3 wrote:
LAME is LGPL'ed, not GPL'ed.
Ops, sorry, in http://www.mp3dev.org/mp3 says GPLed.. I
guess this creates confusion :) (most of my other comments
still apply anyway).
See lame-dir/LICENSE.
Bye,
Alexander.
--
0 and 1. Now what could be so hard
Margaret Clark wrote:
I find this attitude stupid. Here you guys are... using an ILLEGAL
product (or did you pay the legally required licensing fees?),
LAME is not illegal. As others have pointed out, LAME is modified ISO code,
which was freely available at first, but later FHG began
Artemis3 wrote:
Hi Brent!
On Wed, 03 Oct 2001, Brent Geery wrote:
On Wed, 3 Oct 2001 14:45:15 +0200, Niklas Matthies [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On Wed, Oct 03, 2001 at 01:26:59AM +0200, Roel VdB wrote:
[]
I find it appalling and offensive to see a person here shamelessly
I have significant hearing loss in my left ear, so music tends to
sound wrong without using a balance control. Well, my MP3 player does
not have a balance control, so I was wondering if a feature could be
added to LAME that would allow me to selectively lower just a single
channel? Something
I have significant hearing loss in my left ear, so music tends to
sound wrong without using a balance control. Well, my MP3 player does
not have a balance control, so I was wondering if a feature could be
added to LAME that would allow me to selectively lower just a single
channel? Something
J.D. wrote:
I really should insert a somewhat meaningful tidbit for
--adapt-thres-level into LAME's --longhelp, Ironically, this
task has been lingering on my backlogged TO-DO list for some time.
That's my lame excuse anyway. (Oh no! Did I just make a bad pun?
Somebody shoot me with a
Per Bolmstedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have significant hearing loss in my left ear, so music
tends to sound wrong without using a balance control.
Just out of curiousity, why and how does lowering the volume of one channel
help?
I ask because my left ear has been silent (dead hearing
I sincerely hope that before 3.90 is promoted to beta there be a pause
to update and consolodate user documentation
...
It is very frustrating to try and find out what Lame can do and how to
do it to just find cryptic flags that if described at all are usually
done so in jargon meaningful
URL?
http://golem.cs.berkeley.edu/~slingn/research/publications/mm_workload.htm
___
mp3encoder mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
David Balazic wrote:
Because it makes replying only to the author a pain-in-the-ass.
Replying to the author that way is just as hard as replying to the list
now. Are you sure it's good idea making replies to the list a
pain-in-the-ass (your words)?
Also, by your opinion, which kind of
Akos Maroy wrote:
David Balazic wrote:
Because it makes replying only to the author a pain-in-the-ass.
Replying to the author that way is just as hard as replying to the list
now.
Click "Reply-to-all"
- you are replying to the list ( and to the author also )
Click "Reply-to-all" ,
David Balazic wrote:
Very hard to double-click the To: field and hit BACKSPACE ... ( to delete
the authors address )
Why not make the most probable choice the easiest one?
Because it makes replying only to the author a pain-in-the-ass.
I would rather that than making replys to the
Hi Niklas!
On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, Niklas Matthies wrote:
On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 03:35:17PM +0200, David Balazic wrote:
[···]
Why not make the most probable choice the easiest one?
Because it makes replying only to the author a pain-in-the-ass.
- Bug in the MUA. :)
Decent MUAs
Hi Brent!
On Tue, 09 Oct 2001, Brent Geery wrote:
For some unknown reason, there seems to be hostile resistance to
adding a simple balance adjusting feature to LAME. I'm not sure I
understand the hostility. It wouldn't add an load to the programmers
load, as the functions are already
David Balazic wrote:
Why not make the most probable choice the easiest one?
Because it makes replying only to the author a pain-in-the-ass.
It currently makes replying to the list a pain-in-the-ass.
Very hard to double-click the To: field and hit BACKSPACE ...
( to delete the
On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, David Balazic wrote:
Brent Geery wrote:
For some unknown reason, there seems to be hostile resistance to
adding a simple balance adjusting feature to LAME. I'm not sure I
understand the hostility. It wouldn't add an load to the programmers
load, as the functions are already
I think resampling and low-pass are matters that can directly affect quality
of coding. I think balance is a hardware matter and should be left that way.
(Although I'm still pushing for 24 bit decoding!)
David
- Original Message -
From: Stefan Ohlsson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL
Warren Toomey wrote:
I've just changed the Reply-To: field to point to the list, not the
original author.
Please stand by for lots of hate mail from the people who want it to
be the other way around :)
Thanks, Warren. My skin's tough. :-)
Bob
--
Things should be described as
Ross Levis wrote:
David Balazic wrote:
Why not make the most probable choice the easiest one?
Because it makes replying only to the author a pain-in-the-ass.
It currently makes replying to the list a pain-in-the-ass.
Very hard to double-click the To: field and hit
Now assume you'll want to answer to the author one out of ten times - then
its 28 clicks (9*3 + 1) vs. 15 clicks (9*1 + 6).
Harald
- Original Message -
From: "David Balazic" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Ross Levis" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "MP3" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001
Warren Toomey wrote:
I've just changed the Reply-To: field to point to the list, not the
original author.
thanks, good move!
___
mp3encoder mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
On 10 Okt, James Alderman wrote:
hi,
I ma studing at UMIST university, Manchester, England. For
my third year project i have been asked to create an MP3
recorder for a Pocket PC, to be used by a blind person. My
project leader has pointed me in your (that is Lame's)
direction.
You
On Thu, 11 Oct 2001, Youri Pepplinkhuizen wrote:
I agree with the majority on this one. Lame is (or ain't..) an MP3 encoder
and not an audio processing tool. The only reason lowpass and resampling
filters were added is because such processing is required by Lame itself at
certain bitrates,
On 10 Okt, Artemis3 wrote:
This message goes also to the person requesting better
documentation; maybe its time to find the answers for himself,
make a patch to update the documentation and submit the
changes.
Just a little sidenote regarding documentation patches:
You didn't need to
Oh well, if you insist: I agree. No, wait, I disagree.
I'm confused :-D
And I still think, my comparison is just as valid as your's.
Harald
- Original Message -
From: "David Balazic" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: [MP3
On 10 Okt, Brent Geery wrote:
Who is forcing anyone to do anything? I have posted a feature
request; and so far, am only getting fanboy flack. I have received
private emails from *programmers* (not fanboys) expressing their
interest in implementing the feature. From their input, I'm told
Howdy,
I agree with the majority on this one.
I must have missed the vote - when was it scheduled?
Lame is (or ain't..)
an MP3 encoder
and not an audio processing tool. The only reason lowpass and
resampling
filters were added is because such processing is required by
Lame itself at
|Else, you have to use the tools available for your
| enviroment. Maybe you should find a frontend Razorlame like
| program that could make use of many little applications
| together. It would be great, for instance, to resample with
| ssrc and then feed the output to lame. Simple to do it in
On Thu, 11 Oct 2001 16:48:47 +1000 (EST), Warren Toomey
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've just changed the Reply-To: field to point to the list, not the
original author.
Please stand by for lots of hate mail from the people who want it to
be the other way around :)
Great! Now all the hate mail
Hi, all:
I am doing fixed-point lame mp3 encoding,
but there are some problems. Because the data in caclulating psycho model is
very great, they exceed int, and the data of xmin in iteration is very little,
so i have to use mantissa(int or short) and exponent to represent them, but it
runs
Hi, all:
I am doing fixed-point lame mp3 encoding,
but there are some problems. Because the data in caclulating psycho model is
very great, they exceed int, and the data of xmin in iteration is very little,
so i have to use mantissa(int or short) and exponent to represent them, but it
On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 03:53:35PM +0800, caihong wrote:
Hi, all:
I am doing fixed-point lame mp3 encoding, but there are some
problems. Because the data in caclulating psycho model is very
great, they exceed int, and the data of xmin in iteration is very
little, so i have to use
1 - 100 of 1740 matches
Mail list logo
