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 3.99.5 vs LAME 3.98.4 ? (Read 9849 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LAME 3.99.5 vs LAME 3.98.4 ?

Hi

I want to know what is the difference between: LAME 3.99.5 vs LAME 3.98.4 ?

Who is the best ? and knowing i used EAC, And a link to download the best Please ...

LAME 3.99.5 vs LAME 3.98.4 ?

Reply #1 –
I think it's safe to assume that 3.99.5 is better. Or at least no worse.

There have been a number of threads here about the differences. Mostly, it seems that LAME 3.99 attempts to improve sound quality at the very highest quality VBR settings. And that this improvement comes at the expense of higher bitrate encodings (larger files) at settings above -V2. Below that, and at constant bit rates, there's probably little difference.

LAME 3.99.5 vs LAME 3.98.4 ?

Reply #2 –
Thanks JJZolx !!
Please Link of LAME version 3.98.4 for windows 7 -32bits

LAME 3.99.5 vs LAME 3.98.4 ?

Reply #4 –
Quote from: Kojak on
Hi

I want to know what is the difference between: LAME 3.99.5 vs LAME 3.98.4 ?

Who is the best ? and knowing i used EAC, And a link to download the best Please ...


High bitrates are better in LAME 3.99.5. Low bitrates like 128 kbps, though, suck. Use LAME 3.98.4 for those files.
ghostman

LAME 3.99.5 vs LAME 3.98.4 ?

Reply #6 –
I like the last comment in that thread, and have to agree that it feels like that to me also. I'm sure the LAME developers will keep fiddling with it, but it seems like it's well past the point of making any significant gains and has been for years. IMO, the most significant changes to LAME 3.99 were in usability. For instance, adding the ability to embed large images and similar changes that have nothing to do with sound quality.

Quote from: benski on
It definitely feels like LAME has reached a bit where any changes are just trade-offs and compromises rather than absolute improvements.

LAME 3.99.5 vs LAME 3.98.4 ?

Reply #7 –
Quote from: Kohlrabi on
Quote from: themanintheshadows_2451 on
High bitrates are better in LAME 3.99.5. Low bitrates like 128 kbps, though, suck. Use LAME 3.98.4 for those files.
Any proof of that? http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=96800 shows that both are pretty much the same at V5.


Not according to greynol. But I guess he's a liar, right? ;-)
ghostman