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: Lame 3.96.1 compiles (Read 3869 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lame 3.96.1 compiles

are there any differences with lame 3.96.1 from rarewares and mitiok. Does anyone know why the exe sizes are different? I can't seem to find anything on the topic.

Lame 3.96.1 compiles

Reply #1 –
Quote
are there any differences with lame 3.96.1 from rarewares and mitiok. Does anyone know why the exe sizes are different? I can't seem to find anything on the topic.
probably different compilers / flags.
Nothing but a Heartache - Since I found my Baby ;)

Lame 3.96.1 compiles

Reply #2 –
I too am interested as to the differences.  Donunus, please try encoding the same .wav (from commandline) and post about any difference.  I downloaded the Mitiok compile 3.96.1 a while back and the commandline says it's 3.96 (I notice this after encoding 100's of CDs...) 

Lame 3.96.1 compiles

Reply #3 –
Quote
I too am interested as to the differences.  Donunus, please try encoding the same .wav (from commandline) and post about any difference.  I downloaded the Mitiok compile 3.96.1 a while back and the commandline says it's 3.96 (I notice this after encoding 100's of CDs...) 
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=312282"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


That happened to me before but i downloaded another copy and its 3.96.1 is now in the command line. This is still from mitiok. havent tried the rarewares one. just downloaded it now for backup.

I want a few comments first before I experiment but so far the only problem of the 3.96.1 I'm currently ripping with at preset extreme is that sometimes there are time errors with the mp3s(1 out of a thousand or so). I rip the same songs again and it fixes the problem. sounds better IMO than the recommended 3.90.3 Lame. I trusted my impulses  after listening to just a few songs that it didn't sound as dry and seemed to have better PrAt than the older lame.

Lame 3.96.1 compiles

Reply #4 –
This has been brought up many times.  I'm not sure if this thread is still valid:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....topic=20759&hl=

Here are my own tests and some info:


Must be different flags, same compiler in readme from package:

Quote
Compiled with icl 4.5 & nasm.exe & dll were compressed with UPX executable packer http://upx.sourceforge.net/

mitiok


The results from the two compiles are bit-identical:

Code: [Select]
INFO (foo_bitcompare) : Comparing:
INFO (foo_bitcompare) : location: "file://C:\Documents and Settings\_____\Desktop\lame3.96.1\Layla.mp3" (0)
INFO (foo_bitcompare) : location: "file://C:\Documents and Settings\_____\Desktop\lame-3.96.1\Layla.mp3" (0)
INFO (foo_bitcompare) : No differences in decoded data found.
INFO (foo_bitcompare) : Finished successfully.


Here's my speed test, the values fluctuate each time I run them probably because of other things eating up CPU time, but there is no clear winner.  I would venture to say whatever different flags used have no effect on anything, at all.

Code: [Select]
Rarewares: 7.9299x
Mitiok: 8.0164x

Rarewares: 7.9505x
Mitiok: 7.9442x

Rarewares: 7.8996x
Mitiok: 7.9916x


EDIT: This is on a P4, AMD tests may be different.
 

Lame 3.96.1 compiles

Reply #5 –
So negligible differences in speed, basically...

I assume anyone would agree?
"The way we see our world is better than yours."