Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Lame 3.93 alpha encoded files (Read 3679 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lame 3.93 alpha encoded files

I came across some files that were encoded by Lame 3.93 alpha (according to Encspot). I know 3.93 had serious problems regarding the sound quality, at least the presets. But these files are CBR 192 kbps. So i am wondering if my files are ok or not.

Lame 3.93 alpha encoded files

Reply #1 –
Quote
I came across some files that were encoded by Lame 3.93 alpha (according to Encspot). I know 3.93 had serious problems regarding the sound quality, at least the presets. But these files are CBR 192 kbps. So i am wondering if my files are ok or not.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=227930"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
if they sound good to you, the're ok.
Nothing but a Heartache - Since I found my Baby ;)

Lame 3.93 alpha encoded files

Reply #2 –
Quote
I know 3.93 had serious problems regarding the sound quality, at least the presets. [a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=227930"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Could you explain?
Wavpack Hybrid: one encoder for all scenarios
WavPack -c4.5hx6 (44100Hz & 48000Hz) ≈ 390 kbps + correction file
WavPack -c4hx6 (96000Hz) ≈ 768 kbps + correction file
WavPack -h (SACD & DSD) ≈ 2400 kbps at 2.8224 MHz

Lame 3.93 alpha encoded files

Reply #3 –
Quote
Could you explain?

I haven't heard it myself, but i think it is a well known fact. Do a search on the forum. The Lame developers warned us that we should not use that version.

Lame 3.93 alpha encoded files

Reply #4 –
Quote
I came across some files that were encoded by Lame 3.93 alpha (according to Encspot). I know 3.93 had serious problems regarding the sound quality, at least the presets. But these files are CBR 192 kbps. So i am wondering if my files are ok or not.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=227930"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


As far as I know, the breakage in 3.93 only affects '--preset' encodes.  If the mp3 is non-preset cbr 192, then it would be unaffected by the problem.  If your encode is indeed '--preset cbr 192', it is possible that the mp3 is fine, in that you are using 3.93 ALPHA.  The alpha release may not have had the breakage -- that may of came later, but you would have to check.

Lame 3.93 alpha encoded files

Reply #5 –
Quote
Quote
Could you explain?

I haven't heard it myself, but i think it is a well known fact. Do a search on the forum. The Lame developers warned us that we should not use that version.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=227969"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

people shouldn't use any alpha versions at all. alphas are strictly for testing purposes. you should only use the final version to archive music.
Be healthy, be kind, grow rich and prosper
 

Lame 3.93 alpha encoded files

Reply #6 –
i have a cd encoded in 3.93 --aps, and the bitrate is wayy higher than what --aps usually encodes at, one of the mp3's is at an average bitrate of 258 according to encspot, which would be usual for --ape.