LAME presets Reply #75 – 2001-11-08 22:45:38 QuoteOriginally posted by Gabriel You could start with the current frontend and heavily change it. (just one thing please: find a name for this one, not just lame.exe)I know it .. call it BLAME (as in Better LAME or Beginners LAME) QuoteOriginally posted by Dibrom I think that part of the problem with now removing options and having it cause compatibility issues though is due to having such a loose project (organizationally), slow releases, and way way too many options in the first place. I guess there isn't much that can be done at this point though..This is partly a problem but also the beauty of LAME. Most "arbitrary" settings in LAME can be tuned from the outside. I seriously wonder if you would have become interested in tuning LAME if it didn't had all these switches?The downside is clear: it takes knowledge, testing and good hearing to use all that for the better.The real development and experimental switches should maybe be hidden in a "stable" or even an "beta" version. It would not be so hard to make a compile time setting like-D DEVELOPMENT_VERSION to be set in the Alpha versions and removed in the finals (just a lot of #ifdefs in the frontend must be added)I, for one, think at this point that I would prefer a version with optimal defaults (as you propose and have provided with the dm's) but with the possibility to overrule them if I want to. Some decisions when defining a preset are arbitrary, it may depend on the sample, the listener and the listening environment.I could for example do with lower lowpass values most of the time. For some music (at let's say 128kbs) you might need --ns-bass -8 , for other music -4 is ok.Just a thought,Ge Someone.