Conflict with LAME plugin for nero6.x

2003-10-04 18:13:15

Hi, I'm new as a poster but have been following things here for a while and am impressed continously by the quality of discussion-it's phenomenal to have a chance to hear from people as knowledgable and tied to the development of some of the technologies.

That said, I finally got around to purchasing Nero and am planning on trying the LAME codec from cd-rw.org, but am concerned with having 2 builds of LAME on my system since I've been using EAC with the 3.90 version and notice that the AHEAD one is different. Since the whole point of using the codec is to get the best quality(tied to the format because of my ipod) is there a potential for any kind of error/quality loss by installing this? Obviously I'll be careful to set EAC to the "right/3.90" version.

I've also got a quick question about a mystery Coding technologies encoder. In the spring I needed something to get Sonicstage/WMP off my computer and write to dvd, the new nero was still in the works so I found the roxio(yes, i'm embarassed) for 50 bucks and kept a stripped down version around that was recently updated. There are 3 versions of mp3 now, the standard Fraunhofer, a coding technologies mp3pro, and the "mystery" coding technologies standard mp3 codec, which includes VBR to the mid 200s. I've checked the Website for coding technologies, which doesn't even list Roxio as a partner, so that wasn't useful. Run through encspot, it's coming back as what's listed below. I'm not sure how much I'd ever use this since I usually listen through a pair of HD-600's (why anyone would buy computer speakers for anything in this pricerange...) or PX-200s when I don't want to look like a serial killer, so I've been sticking to alt.preset.extreme or standard. But I'm curious, so if anyone wants to go codec slumming, I'd love to figure this out. Thanks for your time and any advice you can give-James

Bitrates:
----------------------------------------------------
32 0.3%
48 0.0%
56 0.0%
64 0.1%
80 0.5%
96 || 1.4%
112 |||||| 3.8%
128 |||||||||| 6.4%
160 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 20.1%
192 |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 25.3%
224 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 23.9%
256 ||||||||||||||||||||| 13.8%
320 ||||||| 4.4%
----------------------------------------------------

Type : mpeg 1 layer III
Bitrate : 198
Mode : stereo
Frequency : 44100 Hz
Frames : 18231
Length : 00:07:56
Av. Reservoir : 47
Emphasis : none
Scalefac : 6.2%
Bad Last Frame : no
Encoder : FhG (fastenc)
Lame Header : No

Conflict with LAME plugin for nero6.x

Reply #1 – 2003-10-04 18:51:40

Quote

That said, I finally got around to purchasing Nero and am planning on trying the LAME codec from cd-rw.org, but am concerned with having 2 builds of LAME on my system since I've been using EAC with the 3.90 version and notice that the AHEAD one is different. Since the whole point of using the codec is to get the best quality(tied to the format because of my ipod) is there a potential for any kind of error/quality loss by installing this? Obviously I'll be careful to set EAC to the "right/3.90" version.

There is absolutely no problem as long as you keep the LAME.exe you use for EAC in a different folder than the NERO codec (why would anyone have them in the same folder I wouldn't know, but I have seen stranger things).
They don't interfere in any way whatsoever.
And of course you should use the recommended compile with EAC (that would be 3.90.3)
About your mistery codec... I don't know.

Conflict with LAME plugin for nero6.x

Reply #2 – 2003-10-04 20:47:04

Thanks for your quick response, I'm definetly going to give it a shot, I just wish the plugin was the earlier/better build. The codec still baffles me, I never thought something I'm not likely to use would frustrate me so much. Again, much appreciated-J

Notice