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 3.99 quality confusion? (Read 2751 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LAME 3.99 quality confusion?

Hi I hope this is a simple question.

But when I ran a spectral frequency analysis for a MP3 song that was previously converted to CBR - 256kbps using LAME 3.92, I noticed the high frequencies were reaching around 22-24,000Hz?! How can this be?

I tried editing this song (e.g. removing silences and reducing hisses etc..) using Adobe Audition 3, then saved in FLAC. I then ran DbPowerAmp using the latest version of LAME, selected the FLAC file from the menu & managed to re-saved in 256kbps. When I open the edited MP3, I noticed the frquency drops from 24,000Hz to 19,500Hz?

Basically is LAME 3.99 inferior to 3.92? Am I better off downloading 3.92 if I wish to enhance the quality of all music I convert from Vinyl into MP3? Im quite confused as to why an earlier version of LAME handles frequencies at a far better rate than 3.98/3.99?
 

LAME 3.99 quality confusion?

Reply #1 –
Actually, nah, we’re not going to run through this whole thing again.

1. As #8 of our Terms of Service states, visual comparisons are of no import to audio, which is processed by the ears, not the eyes.

2. LAME 3.92 is about a million years old. Can you really imagine that the developers have not achieved any forward motion since then, or even worse have actually made things worse?

3. Different versions use different default frequency ranges, etc. You can still change this by specifying so in the command-line.

4. LAME 3.99 is the same in having some different combinations of settings by default; like everything else above, this has been discussed before.

Previous discussions on all of these issues exist and ought to address your topic while sparing everyone the ordeal of retreading the same ground yet once more.