Gabriel Bouvigne just commited LAME 3.97 beta 2 to the CVS repository.
Quoting him: "There are only a few changes compared to b1, so I think that we should be able to release 3.97 soon."
http://lame.sourceforge.net/ (http://lame.sourceforge.net/)
Binaries are available at RareWares (http://www.rarewares.org).
Binaries should be available at RareWares (http://www.rarewares.org) soon.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345429"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Could someone wake up John33?
Here's a stop-gap compile for win32 until John compiles proper, ICL-optimized binaries:
http://www.rarewares.org/rja/Lame-Win32-3.97b2.zip (http://www.rarewares.org/rja/Lame-Win32-3.97b2.zip)
I noticed slight modification on V5 ATHaa sensitivity.
from presets.c (line 370, 388)
Lame 3.97b1
V5 athaa_sensitivity = -16
Lame 3.97b2
V5 athaa_sensitivity = -12
The base compile is now at Rarewares MP3 page. The other compiles will follow.
If I have understood communications on the lame-dev mailing list correctly, this beta may change a little later after Gabriel has backported some stuff from the CVS head (ie., the alpha).
AS switch has been reintroduced in the cli...good to know.
The base compile is now at Rarewares MP3 page. The other compiles will follow.
If I have understood communications on the lame-dev mailing list correctly, this beta may change a little later after Gabriel has backported some stuff from the CVS head (ie., the alpha).
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345529"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
lameACM.acm of beta 2 is 181 KB while lameACM.acm of beta 1 is 269 KB. Is the size difference normal?
lameACM.acm of beta 2 is 181 KB while lameACM.acm of beta 1 is 269 KB. Is the size difference normal?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345537"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The difference is due to the b2 ACM compile being an MSVC6 one rather than the ICL9.0 of b1. It seemed from the lame mailing lists that people were having difficulties with the ICL compile so I thought it was worth trying a standard VC6 version.
Hi,
Is there a apt-key signature key for your debian RareWare repositories. I'm using sid and I can just use --allow-unauthenticated with apt-get but I like to use aptitude and it just looks ugly with all those U's splattered all over the place.
thanks
The base compile is now at Rarewares MP3 page. The other compiles will follow.
If I have understood communications on the lame-dev mailing list correctly, this beta may change a little later after Gabriel has backported some stuff from the CVS head (ie., the alpha).
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345529"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Looking forward to the version with the INI setup.
Another step towards a stable new lame version I'm looking forward to that, since all linux distributions will update lame too.
I know, I could compile it myself, but since I'm rather lazy...
I will post a 'final' beta, plus derivative compiles, once the beta 2 version is announced at Sourceforge. Only then can we be sure that we have the full beta 2 release.
Quoting him: "There are only a few changes compared to b1, so I think that we should be able to release 3.97 soon."[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345429"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think it's always useful to detail the changes made for any software update.
I'm sure it's detailed in the lame cvs (somewhere), but since you went to the effort to tell us about the update, it would've been nice to have stated the changes made in the same post. Or maybe Gabriel could/should do that?
I think it's always useful to detail the changes made for any software update.
I'm sure it's detailed in the lame cvs (somewhere), but since you went to the effort to tell us about the update, it would've been nice to have stated the changes made in the same post. Or maybe Gabriel could/should do that?
I guess Roberto also doesn't know what the changes are (yet), otherwise he probably would have written them down.
I'll glady see a newsflash with just some notes or brief descriptions rather than no news at all as far as I am concerned
I'll glady see a newsflash with just some notes or brief descriptions rather than no news at all as far as I am concerned
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345911"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Agree, and I'm not saying we shouldn't have had any update. Thanks to Roberto for posting. Just a prompt really for someone to update it with the changes that's all
From another thread (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=37989):
@halb27:
You may find the information here of intrest to you:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/*che...y.html?rev=HEAD (http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/*checkout*/lame/lame/doc/html/history.html?rev=HEAD)
LAME 3.97 beta 2 November 26 2005
* Gabriel Bouvigne:
o Fixed an initialization error when input is not using a standard sampling frequency
o Fixed a possible assertion failure in very low bitrate encoding
o Slight change regarding ATH adjustment with V5
o Reinstated bit reservoir for 320kbps CBR
o ReplayGain analysis should now be faster when encountering silent parts
* Takehiro Tominaga:
o Fixed a possible link problem of assembly code
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345793"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
@halb27: .... Reinstated bit reservoir for 320kbps CBR ...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345914"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thank you, grreat news.
Since LAME 3.97 beta 2 is out, should we use it instead of LAME 3.97 beta 1 or not yet ?
LAME 3.97 beta 2 November 26 2005
Gabriel Bouvigne:
- Fixed an initialization error when input is not using a standard sampling frequency
- Fixed a possible assertion failure in very low bitrate encoding
- Slight change regarding ATH adjustment with V5
- Reinstated bit reservoir for 320kbps CBR
Takehiro Tominaga:
- Fixed a possible link problem of assembly code
Gr.
@halb27: .... Reinstated bit reservoir for 320kbps CBR ...
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345914"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thank you, grreat news.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345927"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Congratulations Halb! and +Respect to Gabriel for hacking it out with you and taking it onboard
I suggest to change the recommnded settings topic & recommnded compiles topic, to recommend now 3.97b2 inseatd of 3.97b1.
I suggest to change the recommnded settings topic & recommnded compiles topic, to recommend now 3.97b2 inseatd of 3.97b1.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345966"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, we should do that.
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'](User: Please answer to my PMs next time.)[/span]
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%'](User: Please answer to my PMs next time.)[/span]
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345970"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Sorry, I answered, when there was time. Unfortunately, we aren't paid for HA-work Changes from various persons were suggested, so I decided to watch the daily or even hourly proposed changes. Now it has settled down a bit, and I have time again for the moment to work on mp3, but the topic is closed and i cannot edit. If the topic is opened for edition of the lame 3.97b2, I will look for incorporation of layout/wording changes, also.[/span]
If the topic is opened for edition of the lame 3.97b2, I will look for incorporation of layout/wording changes, also.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345981"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Okay, opened. Please take note of the changes you make so it can be edited in the Wiki as well.
o ReplayGain analysis should now be faster when encountering silent parts
Maybe related, but awhile ago I created a silent sound file in soundforge and encoded it with: mppenc, LAME, and Nero AAC.
I noticed that LAME took approximately 7x longer to encode pure silence than the others. I thought it was a little strange.
o ReplayGain analysis should now be faster when encountering silent parts
Maybe related, but awhile ago I created a silent sound file in soundforge and encoded it with: mppenc, LAME, and Nero AAC.
I noticed that LAME took approximately 7x longer to encode pure silence than the others. I thought it was a little strange.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346012"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hehe, maybe it's those denormals again?
Hi,
Is there a apt-key signature key for your debian RareWare repositories. I'm using sid and I can just use --allow-unauthenticated with apt-get but I like to use aptitude and it just looks ugly with all those U's splattered all over the place.
thanks
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345770"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
no. i don't develop/package with a key yet (so, none is available for the repo). It isn't a high priority, either.
(...oh, i'll get to 3.97b2 when i get home from work, btw)
later
I will post a 'final' beta, plus derivative compiles, once the beta 2 version is announced at Sourceforge. Only then can we be sure that we have the full beta 2 release.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345890"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's unclear to me, has this been done now ?
EDIT: I'm not quite sure how to go about checking for announcement of the beta 2 version at Sourceforge, is there a link ?
Regards,
Madrigal
I will post a 'final' beta, plus derivative compiles, once the beta 2 version is announced at Sourceforge. Only then can we be sure that we have the full beta 2 release.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345890"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's unclear to me, has this been done now ?
EDIT: I'm not quite sure how to go about checking for announcement of the beta 2 version at Sourceforge, is there a link ?
Regards,
Madrigal
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346261"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
All the beta 2 compiles now at Rarewares are the
final beta 2 versions.
All the beta 2 compiles now at Rarewares are the final beta 2 versions.
Thank you.
Regards,
Madrigal
Thanks John.
NB: lamedropXPd says it is using beta 1. Edit: On Encoding Options dialogue.
I like the spinning LAME logo.
Thanks John.
NB: lamedropXPd says it is using beta 1. Edit: On Encoding Options dialogue.
Oh b*gg*r!! OK, I've fixed that and uploaded again. It was only the narrative, it was using the correct libs. BTW, thanks for letting me know.
I like the spinning LAME logo.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346268"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks a bunch, john33! Appreciated.
Thanks a bunch, john33! Appreciated.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346311"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Same here! Thx to the LAME devs also!
...and I just finished encoding 11,000+ songs with B1, lol. Glad I have them all FLAC'd.
note: Theres only a point in re-encoding if they're at preset fast medium or i (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/fourwinds/tempx/insane.mp3)nsane. Not an urgent need to do so even if so.
-V 2 --vbr-new -Y
That's what I use, so I probably won't re-encode for awhile ;-)
i (http://homepage.ntlworld.com/fourwinds/tempx/insane.mp3)nsane. [a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346434"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
te he - now that's a sneaky little link in the 'i' isn't it
lamedropXPd writes comment field: Encoded using LAME-3.97b1 in tag.
-V 2 --vbr-new -Y
That's what I use, so I probably won't re-encode for awhile ;-)
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346435"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sorry, but what is -Y for?
-V 2 --vbr-new -Y
That's what I use, so I probably won't re-encode for awhile ;-)
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346435"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sorry, but what is -Y for?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346576"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Disables SFB21, so nothing above 16khz is encoded. Personal preference, because I can't hear that high anyway, and it reduces filesize.
Edit: yes, i know about preset medium
te he - now that's a sneaky little link in the 'i' isn't it
-must be a bug in the forum software hawkeye...
lamedropXPd writes comment field: Encoded using LAME-3.97b1 in tag.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=346572"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
And, again - b*gg*r!! I think I'll simply remove that tag - it's not exactly necessary. Thanks for the notification. I'll upload again a little later.
lame.exe fixed for .mp2 and mp3 decoding: lame.exe only (ICL4.5). For mp3 and mp2 decoding, this now yields the same output as foobar2000 but the error checking remains unchanged.
2005-11-29
That's for 3.97b2. 3.97b1 had a fixed exe as well from what I remember and 3.96.1.
Why have a fixed exe for decoding separately for each version? Can't the fixes be included in the regular versions?
lame.exe fixed for .mp2 and mp3 decoding: lame.exe only (ICL4.5). For mp3 and mp2 decoding, this now yields the same output as foobar2000 but the error checking remains unchanged.
2005-11-29
That's for 3.97b2. 3.97b1 had a fixed exe as well from what I remember and 3.96.1.
Why have a fixed exe for decoding separately for each version? Can't the fixes be included in the regular versions?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=347323"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The necessary changes have now been merged into the latest 3.98alpha so there will be no more 'fixed' versions after the 3.97 ones.
o ReplayGain analysis should now be faster when encountering silent parts
Maybe related, but awhile ago I created a silent sound file in soundforge and encoded it with: mppenc, LAME, and Nero AAC.
I noticed that LAME took approximately 7x longer to encode pure silence than the others. I thought it was a little strange.[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=346012")
This has obviously changed. Analyzing silent parts is much faster now. I tested the behavior in this thread: [a href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=39198]http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=39198[/url].
I just noticed this.
"Your file doesn't exist, or you didn't select one."
The Win32 and LameDrop XPd download links at the recommended LAME compiles Wiki page are broken:
List of recommended LAME compiles (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=28123)
http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Lame_Compiles (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Lame_Compiles)
3.98a2 (up at Rarewares); is it safe?
3.98a2 (up at Rarewares); is it safe?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=348284")
From [a href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=28125]This sticky thread:[/url]
Lame alphas are ONLY for testing. Do NOT use Lame alphas unless you want to test it and maybe provide feedback.
From This sticky thread: (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=28125)
Lame alphas are ONLY for testing. Do NOT use Lame alphas unless you want to test it and maybe provide feedback.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=348287"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
thanks. yes, i know it says that. i'm still curious if anyone has had any problems running it.
Maybe you can tell us your experiences in the meanwhile?
-V 2 --vbr-new -Y
I use the same parameter
Isn't it time for a final release of 3.97 and to continue on 3.98a dev?
yes, i know it says that.
Then why are you questioning it?
i'm still curious if anyone has had any problems running it.
Don't forget that
you are the "anyone" that some other lazy person is looking to for answers.
Regards,
Madrigal
thanks. yes, i know it says that. i'm still curious if anyone has had any problems running it.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=348291")
I'm pretty sure it's no problem
running it, otherwise Rarewares would not upload. But you can't be sure about quality of encoded mp3's from this alpha, that's the risk with alphas. [a href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=39409]Here[/url] is a HA thread about Lame 3.98 alpha testing.