Skip to main content


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: Is safe if using slow standard? (Read 3258 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Is safe if using slow standard?

Hi Dibrom,

I've read all the new posts, but am still confused...

I only use --alt-preset standard
I do not use --alt-preset fast standard

However, is it safe for me to use and
--alt-preset standard?  All the quality bugs mentioned only affected --alt-preset fast standard, right?

Yet when i did a file compare with a hex editor ( on two mp3s each made from the same .wav and line: --alt-preset standard, one from this lame.exe and one from winhex reported that there were 7 million differences!!!! But I thought ONLY --alt-preset fast standard was tweaked????

If not, was was changed then about --alt-preset standard in

I'm thinking of just staying with unless there are problems i don't know about...

Any help appreciated....
And happy holidays to all...

Is safe if using slow standard?

Reply #1
The compile listed in the recommended compile section works fine with both --alt-preset standard and fast standard.  Quality due to issues mentioned in other threads are no longer a problem, and unless a new thread pops up, everything should be "fine".  I've completely eliminated the source of the problem listed in kye's thread.

As for using a hex editor to compare.  Things at compile time were slightly different this time, as well as other modifications made (The addition to the header) which should affect the hex offset I believe.  A simple compare isn't going to mean much.  There were no code changes at all to vbr-old or --alt-preset standard.

Is safe if using slow standard?

Reply #2
OK I am a fool!

I must have misplaced one of my mp3 files....

I just did the tests all over again and you are vindicated Dibrom...

The decoded .wavs are identical... as checked with EAC.

So actually, if one only wishes to use --alt-preset standard then Lame 3.90 stable is good enough... though for --alt-preset fast standard Lame 3.90.2 is the way to go....

Thanks and sorry for the confusion...

Have a great Holiday!!!!