Maybe its a silly question, but where can i download lame 3.99.5 not 3.99r?
Every time i get lame 3.99.5, mediainfo says its 3.99r
Maybe its a silly question, but where can i download lame 3.99.5 not 3.99r?
Every time i get lame 3.99.5, mediainfo says its 3.99r
Here - http://www.rarewares.org/mp3-lame-bundle.php
And here - https://www.filehorse.com/download-lame-mp3-encoder-64/
https://www.filehorse.com/download-lame-mp3-encoder-32/
I said i dont want lame 3.99r but 3.99.5
This is what mediainfo says after downloading http://www.rarewares.org/mp3-lame-bundle.php lame 3.99.5
Writing library : LAME3.99r
What the hell?
This is what mediainfo says
So what?
I said i dont want lame 3.99r but 3.99.5
This is what mediainfo says after downloading http://www.rarewares.org/mp3-lame-bundle.php lame 3.99.5
Writing library : LAME3.99r
What the hell?
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,114777.msg946895.html#msg946895
Hmm ok, i have read that. Please explain me how is that i have 2 files
1. File encoded with lame 3.99.5 downloaded from somewhere. Mediainfo says Writing library : LAME3.99.5
2. The same file but encoded by myself from WAV to MP3 with also lame 3.99.5. And in this case Mediainfo says Writing library : LAME3.99r
I'm asking why is that happening?
Your software isn't parsing the entire version string. If in doubt, try other software or check with a hex editor.
Ok so let me rephrase. How can i encode WAV file so it will say LAME3.99.5 instead 3.99r?
So far every software (mediainfo, foobar2000, encspot pro) i got says that file was encoded using lame 3.99r although i used lame 3.99.5
Long story short, it doesn't fit. Lame has 9 characters available for writing that Tag. Otherwise they may run into compatibility issues with older software. "a", "b", and "r" where already used in the past, so they are sticking to what works.
LAME3.99.5
123456789-
This has been covered before. Many workarounds have been suggested, but it's hard to implement one without breaking compatibility with something.
https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,91372.175.html
My suggestion to them, is to write the longer version information in a new tag, that can support more bytes without breaking any software. And keep working with both tags. We'll still have the problem that older software will simply not be able to show the intended version.
EDIT:
You'll have to get a hex editor to see the difference in your tags. My guess is one is being parsed and expanded to get the ".5" (dot five). Or they are reading the full version from another tag. Because according to design, it shouldn't fit.
As for why some software might detect the correct version, that most probably comes from knowing that when LAME add padding to tracks (usually with CBR, but at the start or end of tracks it can also happen on VBR), it writes the text LAME and its full version.
But as said by Makaki, software that only relies on the LAME tag, can not be as much precise, because the encoder does not have enough space in there for it.
Audio Format : MPEG Audio Format version : Version 1 Format profile : Layer 3 Format settings : Joint stereo / MS Stereo Duration : 5 min 37 s Bit rate mode : Constant Bit rate : 320 kb/s Channel(s) : 2 channels Sampling rate : 44.1 kHz Frame rate : 38.281 FPS (1152 SPF) Compression mode : Lossy Stream size : 12.9 MiB (100%) Writing library : LAME3.99.5 |
This a track i purchased at google play today.
LAME3.99.5 is 10 chars, not 9
So i don wonder how can i encode a file to be detected the same way.
Guess it's a tricky thing to do. If you can think of some way, let me know.
Care to name a track encoded with that version? I purchased a random track and it was encoded with 3.98. I don't want to try my luck further.
Sure
https://play.google.com/store/music/album/Steve_Allen_Re_Given?id=Ba7g3plgkqbnnw6mqtszhxd3bcq
Re-Given
Steve Allen
Tracks thats been released this and previous year are ecnoded with lame 3.99.5
All before 2017 with various versions of lame
I don't know MP3 stream details but the information isn't stored in a header. The version string is spread throughout the length of the file followed by several bytes of zero padding. It's there almost 5 times per second, 834 instances in a 2 minutes 52 seconds long track.
Here's 11 seconds long snippet from the MP3 file. Someone who's familiar with the format should be able to say what's the field holding the info.
This file doesn't have version info in its header, and it looks like mediainfo searches padding for lame version string. I changed the first "LAME3.99.5" byte sequence into "LAME3.99.1", and mediainfo started to report this version.
Maybe its a silly question, but where can i download lame 3.99.5 not 3.99r?
Every time i get lame 3.99.5, mediainfo says its 3.99r
Here - http://www.rarewares.org/mp3-lame-bundle.php
And here - https://www.filehorse.com/download-lame-mp3-encoder-64/
https://www.filehorse.com/download-lame-mp3-encoder-32/
hi
I don't want to go offtopic
but at rarewares i can't find anymore lame 3.95.5 64bit , but i have downloaded from rarewares when it was released 64bit, few seconds ago i download from filehorse the 64bit and the hashes are different
lame 3.95.5 64bit from rarewares is
lame.exe SHA-256: DE9128F8160C6F5B4E0F4AF2ED14000AD9DEE8EF72186F08761CA83046CBFE9E
lame_enc.dll SHA-256: ECD5AEF88EE82A1A94E673C9ABEA307CFB431FA17E21B5B72B232620DF440257
lame 3.95.5 64bit from filehorse
lame.exe SHA-256: 5F60737552FD5E2AD7DB77837133DB23BDECF1C92BE60FB4C828DEE8377FD6A5
lame_enc.dll SHA-256: B38214EB1DE168193A3A20DBB319CBC14BB32472ECB89EE27349AF227DC8BAAF
thanks
Sorry if that's off topic, but why do you want this specific version of LAME? (if that's not a secret reason)
Sorry if that's off topic, but why do you want this specific version of LAME? (if that's not a secret reason)
hi
i use LAME 3.100 64bit downloaded from rarewaves but i was reading this topic , i found it interesting and i have downloaded older version only to contribute to the topic with some tests , and so i have noticed the differents hashes
thanks
Sorry if that's off topic, but why do you want this specific version of LAME? (if that's not a secret reason)
Based on his other topic (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,116062.0.html) on foobar2000 section I think he wants to create fake Google Play Music encodes.
Sorry if that's off topic, but why do you want this specific version of LAME? (if that's not a secret reason)
Based on his other topic (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,116062.0.html) on foobar2000 section I think he wants to create fake Google Play Music encodes.
Indeed…
Dont ask my why im interested in this. Just help me achieve my goal.
Thats correct