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: Getting FhG MP3Enc (Read 2067 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Getting FhG MP3Enc

Hello. How can I get the full version of FhG MP3Enc? (While I don't have a license for it, I technically have a license for it as I have a license for Adobe Flash CS6 and it's included in it, so this is legal).

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #5 –
You are welcome.

These files have been in public domain since forever. The MP3 licensing program has long been ceased so these ones are effectively free to use, surely free for personal use.

If moderators disagree, here's my own storage link. This will be live until I breathe.

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #6 –
Quote from: birdie on
You are welcome.

These files have been in public domain since forever. The MP3 licensing program has long been ceased so these ones are effectively free to use, surely free for personal use.

If moderators disagree, here's my own storage link. This will be live until I breathe.

Thanks, but this gives a different output than MP3Enc Demo that I downloaded from RRW (more different than being untrimmed). Does anyone know why?

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #7 –
I'd like to know why you'd like this specific encoder? What about it is interesting to you?

Just curious

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #8 –
Isn't curiosity an adequate explanation?  Sauce for the goose...
It's your privilege to disagree, but that doesn't make you right and me wrong.

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #9 –
Quote from: darkalex on
I'd like to know why you'd like this specific encoder? What about it is interesting to you?

Just curious

I like it's sound color, also Flash uses it.

It's only disadvantage is that it uses lower-than-ideal cutoff points for some bitrate-samplerate-channelconfig combinations, at least for me.

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #10 –
Quote from: Klymins on
Quote from: Markuza97 on
https://www.rarewares.org/rrw/files/fhg/mp3enc31.zip
This asks for a license and links are broken.

Works fine here. License is in the nfo file.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I encoded couple of random songs just for fun using CBR 128 kbit/s, Results are interesting...

1. MP3enc is bad, very bad.
2. LAME is tiny bit better but it still has lots of audible artifacts. Not usable.
3. l3enc (using DOSBox) is surprisingly good. I could totally listen to this in noisy environment.
4. MP3 surround is best.

I always liked Fraunhofer more for CBR so MP3 surround being best does not surprise me.
The only thing that surprised me is l3enc. It's funny how something from 1997 is better than latest LAME at these settings.
gold plated toslink fan

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #11 –
Quote from: Markuza97 on
Quote from: Klymins on
Quote from: Markuza97 on
https://www.rarewares.org/rrw/files/fhg/mp3enc31.zip
This asks for a license and links are broken.

Works fine here. License is in the nfo file.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I encoded couple of random songs just for fun using CBR 128 kbit/s, Results are interesting...

1. MP3enc is bad, very bad.
2. LAME is tiny bit better but it still has lots of audible artifacts. Not usable.
3. l3enc (using DOSBox) is surprisingly good. I could totally listen to this in noisy environment.
4. MP3 surround is best.

I always liked Fraunhofer more for CBR so MP3 surround being best does not surprise me.
The only thing that surprised me is l3enc. It's funny how something from 1997 is better than latest LAME at these settings.

128kbps CBR is totally transparent to me with most encoders (MP3Enc, Fastencc, LAME, maybe more; but I prefer MP3Enc) at 44100Hz stereo, did you use LR stereo mode @Markuza97 ? If not, I can't believe that 128kbps CBR can be very bad for someone. Even 112kbps is almost transparent to me with most encoders. But thanks for licensing information (I could not open the .nfo file).

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #12 –
Quote from: Markuza97 on
I encoded couple of random songs just for fun using CBR 128 kbit/s, Results are interesting...

1. MP3enc is bad, very bad.
2. LAME is tiny bit better but it still has lots of audible artifacts. Not usable.
3. l3enc (using DOSBox) is surprisingly good. I could totally listen to this in noisy environment.
4. MP3 surround is best.

Regarding LAME and CBR, you might want to specify "-q4" as encoding parameter, due to this bug: https://sourceforge.net/p/lame/bugs/516/

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #13 –
Quote from: maikmerten on
Regarding LAME and CBR, you might want to specify "-q4" as encoding parameter, due to this bug:
https://sourceforge.net/p/lame/bugs/516/

I know ;)
We talked about it couple of months ago:
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,126120.msg1046719.html#msg1046719

Most people will only use -b and -V command (-br for FhG), so I didn't use any fancy quality commands.
But yeah, using -q4 easily outperforms all encoders. I still believe your patch needs to be released as major version, it fixes critical bug.

I also added files if somebody want to test them by himself.
gold plated toslink fan

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #14 –
Quote from: Markuza97 on
Quote from: maikmerten on
Regarding LAME and CBR, you might want to specify "-q4" as encoding parameter, due to this bug:
https://sourceforge.net/p/lame/bugs/516/

I know ;)
We talked about it couple of months ago:
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,126120.msg1046719.html#msg1046719

Most people will only use -b and -V command (-br for FhG), so I didn't use any fancy quality commands.
But yeah, using -q4 easily outperforms all encoders. I still believe your patch needs to be released as major version, it fixes critical bug.

I also added files if somebody want to test them by himself.

Thanks for the samples, I didn't hear any difference between them (as I expected).

Edit: By the way, I highly recommend everyone to use the lowest quality setting on FhG MP3Enc. At higher quality settings, MP3Enc will apply a soft cutoff and this will ruin the efficiency.

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #15 –
Quote from: Klymins on
Quote from: Markuza97 on
Quote from: maikmerten on
Regarding LAME and CBR, you might want to specify "-q4" as encoding parameter, due to this bug:
https://sourceforge.net/p/lame/bugs/516/

I know ;)
We talked about it couple of months ago:
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,126120.msg1046719.html#msg1046719

Most people will only use -b and -V command (-br for FhG), so I didn't use any fancy quality commands.
But yeah, using -q4 easily outperforms all encoders. I still believe your patch needs to be released as major version, it fixes critical bug.

I also added files if somebody want to test them by himself.

Thanks for the samples, I didn't hear any difference between them (as I expected).

Edit: By the way, I highly recommend everyone to use the lowest quality setting on FhG MP3Enc. At higher quality settings, MP3Enc will apply a soft cutoff and this will ruin the efficiency.

Correction: I detected that MP3Enc starts to use a soft cutoff at quality level 4, so maybe quality level 1, 2, or 3 are better. I don't know which one is the best.

Re: Getting FhG MP3Enc

Reply #16 –
Now I want to get the source code of FhG MP3Enc, does anybody have it or know how can I get it?