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: Internal vs. external LAME (Read 2217 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Internal vs. external LAME

Hi all, especially the developers and experts-question to you,

I experimented a bit with the recent Lame 3.97a6 and used several rippers. I met with problems in using ext. encoder, especially in correct parameter string setting. I want to use the quality corresponding to --preset fast standard. (cca 190 VBR, joint stereo, new method, quality V2) which seems in listening tests quite promisable.
In Presets, the recommended string is as follows:
lame --preset fast standard
which doesn´t work with any mentioned ripper, so I tried more usual (without front "lame")
--preset fast standard or -V 2 --vbr-new (should be equivalent).
This setting worked only in EAC, whilst Audiograbber worked (but far from good) with
--preset fast standard %s %d or -V 2 --vbr-new %s %d
but some tracks of all selected CD tracks were not encoded at all (process did not start), given a wrong file name, put in a wrong directory or given no suffix (mp3) .
CDEx did not work in any combination. What was done wrong or where is the problem?

I have never experienced these difficulties using internal Lame_enc.dll, so maybe I will come back to it again.

I have read that using external encoder may give a better sound than internal one (when both are set in corresponding way, of course). Is that true or not?
Regards,

Crzmn