Skip to main content
Topic: Lame 3.97 beta 1 released (Read 92956 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Lame version 3.97 beta 1 is available at rarewares, this is good news for all those alphaphobes around here.
we was young an' full of beans

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #1
Excellent. 
Great work from the LAME devs.
And thanks for the early heads-up skelly831.

Would I be correct in assuming that there is actually no difference in the encoder bewteen 3.97a12 and 3.97b1?

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #2
Great! 

Quote
Would I be correct in assuming that there is actually no difference in the encoder bewteen 3.97a12 and 3.97b1?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326318"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'd like to know too.

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #3
Quote
Great! 

Quote
Would I be correct in assuming that there is actually no difference in the encoder bewteen 3.97a12 and 3.97b1?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326318"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'd like to know too.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326321"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]



I see no differences apart from the version tags after comparing the mp3's produced with -apfs

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #4
Actually the a12 .exe is 181kb while the b1 .exe is 163kb.
we was young an' full of beans

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #5
jaybeee

Quote
Excellent. Great work from the LAME devs.


Quote
Would I be correct in assuming that there is actually no difference in the encoder bewteen 3.97a12 and 3.97b1?


Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #6
Supposedly, it isn't out yet (or the CVS changelog isn't up to date?)

LAME 3.97 alpha (CVS)

Robert Hegemann:

Fixed and out of array access
Fixed some small rounding problem in vbr-new quantization routines
Updated scalefactors allocation scheme in vbr-new
Fixed mingw32 configure problems
Resolved some compiler warnings

Gabriel Bouvigne:

Changed some FLOAT8 to FLOAT
Reworked -q1 and -q0
Updated presets
Fixed an error in ISO quantization on systems not using the IEEE754 hack
Faster quantization
SSE version of init_xrpow

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #7
See the 'history.html' in the download.  In quality terms, I believe there is little, or no, difference between a12 and b1.
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #8
BTW, this is a great present for my birthday. Thank you very much, dear developers

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #9
Quote
BTW, this is a great present for my birthday.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326330"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Can you prove this is a "great" present, do you have ABX results?

JK, Happy Birthday, Leo 69!
we was young an' full of beans

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #10
Quote
BTW, this is a great present for my birthday. Thank you very much, dear developers
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326330"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i was just thinking the same thing!  today is my birthday as well.

edit: btw, shouldn't this be an official announcement?
a windows-free, linux user since 1/31/06.

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #11
i didn't feel like starting a new thread for such a simple question, but i was wondering if it made any sense to use -q 0 with -V2 --vbr-new.  I know it will slow down encoding time, but if in some cases it will pinch out some extra quality or cut out some bits, it may be useful to me.
a windows-free, linux user since 1/31/06.

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #12
AFAIK they fixed the old bugs in -q0 and -q1 during 3.97's alpha stage so assuming there aren't any more unknown bugs it should be safe.  Now whether or not you should use them is an entirely different matter
Nero AAC 1.5.1.0: -q0.45

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #13
Is vbr-new default for "vbr" mode in beta1?

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #14
the apelllation beta affords some psychological comfort ;-)
The regression report inclines me to use V0, q remaining the same.

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #15
Quote
Is vbr-new default for "vbr" mode in beta1?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326394"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No. Could one of the developers please explain what is planned in this regard?

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #16
I see that there is a slight speed drop in vbr_new on my machine:
397a12 --vbr-new: 16.2x
397b1 --vbr-new: 15.5x

The differences down to vbr_old is getting narrower:

397b1 --vbr-old: 11.0x

It varies slightly on different music.


edit: When I ran another sample, I still found the speed drop, but also bigger differences between old and new (which it should be).
397a12 --vbr-new: 17.2x
397b1 --vbr-new: 16.5x

397a12 --vbr-old: 10.2x
397b1 --vbr-old: 10.2x

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #17
w00t!

Lets hope for a final soon.

Edit: If --vbr-new is said to produce the same, and in some cases slightly better, results at a faster encoding speed than the standard vbr algorithm, then why is the standard algorithm even included? It makes much more sense to just remove it and set --vbr-new to default, IMO.
</signature>

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #18
Vbr-new will probably NOT be defaulted in 3.97. While this vbr mode itself seems fine, defaulting it is not tested enough and would require differing release.

As it has been a long time since last release, and as 3.97 should bring significant improvements compared to previous release, it is released but featuring the legacy vbr mode as default.

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #19
I think --vbr-new should be recommended in the new "Recommended Settings" thread, so people start using it and report failure/problem cases.
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #20
Is it now "safe" to use 3.97b1 instead of 3.96.1?

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #21
Quote
I see that there is a slight speed drop in vbr_new on my machine:
397a12 --vbr-new: 16.2x
397b1 --vbr-new: 15.5x

The differences down to vbr_old is getting narrower:

397b1 --vbr-old: 11.0x

It varies slightly on different music.


edit: When I ran another sample, I still found the speed drop, but also bigger differences between old and new (which it should be).
397a12 --vbr-new: 17.2x
397b1 --vbr-new: 16.5x

397a12 --vbr-old: 10.2x
397b1 --vbr-old: 10.2x
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326404"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

the newer vbr code hasn't changed for quite some time, so there should be no speed decrease. what exactly is your commandline at full length?

Lame 3.97 beta 1 released

Reply #22
Sorry, guys, I had compiled using the stock options rather than those that I normally use.  I've recompiled and uploaded again. The speed should now be as before.
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/



 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019