LAME 4.0 alpha 13 CLI encoder for TESTING ONLY 20 |
  |
LAME 4.0 alpha 13 CLI encoder for TESTING ONLY 20 |
 Feb 28 2005, 20:30
Post
#1
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 44 Joined: 9-January 02 Member No.: 963  |
I've notice something new on rarewares.
Just FYI, I'm doing some encoding now, only for testing purposes of course 
|
 |
 
|
|
Feb 28 2005, 21:40
Post
#2
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 168 Joined: 27-February 05 Member No.: 20208 |
i can't find this on the rarewares. strange?
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 28 2005, 21:56
Post
#3
|
|
 Rarewares admin Group: Members Posts: 7515 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Brazil Member No.: 81 |
QUOTE (earphiler @ Feb 28 2005, 05:40 PM) i can't find this on the rarewares. strange?  http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html Second entry from the bottom. Although I believe these things shouldn't even be announced here at the forums. Stupidity often ensues when it happens. If it was to be announced, I guess John33 would have done it, and announced it at RW's index page... -------------------- Get up-to-date binaries of Lame, AAC, Vorbis and much more at RareWares:
http://www.rarewares.org |
|
|
|
|
Feb 28 2005, 22:03
Post
#4
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 168 Joined: 27-February 05 Member No.: 20208 |
sorry about that/ i never wouldn't looked towards the bottom, would've thought that it would be at the top with the other LAME versions.
why is it that testing for 3.97 and 4.0 are going on simultaneously? |
|
|
|
|
Feb 28 2005, 22:07
Post
#5
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 3353 Joined: 6-July 03 From: Sachsen (DE) Member No.: 7609 |
QUOTE (rjamorim @ Feb 28 2005, 10:56 PM) QUOTE (earphiler @ Feb 28 2005, 05:40 PM) i can't find this on the rarewares. strange? http://www.rarewares.org/mp3.html Second entry from the bottom. Although I believe these things shouldn't even be announced here at the forums. Stupidity often ensues when it happens. If it was to be announced, I guess John33 would have done it, and announced it at RW's index page... Okay, then lets have the following in one of the earliest comments in this thread: This version (4.0 alpha) is probably of worse quality than the latest stable version! This compile is for developers and people who want to do listening tests only. When a version becomes ready for mainstream testing, its called "beta". The above version is especially probable to contain ugly quality-bugs because it is based on a completely new (untuned) encoder. -------------------- I am arrogant and I can afford it because I deliver.
|
|
|
|
|
Feb 28 2005, 22:08
Post
#6
|
|
 xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer Group: Developer Posts: 3708 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Bracknell, UK Member No.: 111 |
Some may recall that I posted alpha 12 a while back, and I've been updating this as Takehiro updated the CVS. As it's now gone to alpha 13, and therefore the old link is broken, I thought it better to hide it at the bottom of the mp3 page at Rarewares so that it was more readily available.
As Roberto has indicated, it wasn't intended to be announced, as such, it was just there for those who took the trouble to look. As stated many times before, this is NOT yet ready for user testing. Takehiro will ask for that when he's ready. It is just there for people to see what progress he's making and the direction it's going in. -------------------- John
---------------------------------------------------------------- My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/ |
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 14:07
Post
#7
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 21 Joined: 22-February 05 Member No.: 20067 |
I tested this out last night and was suprised how quick it encoded an mp3. It was at least twice as fast as 3.90.3, possible more. Is it written with SSE CPU optimization code built it or it utilising a new compression engine?
The initial file output was much smaller but in comparison had a much lower bitrate for preset standard than 3.96.1. I'd like to know more info about this version so i know what to look out for. I'd like to start some hardcore testing 
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 14:13
Post
#8
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 1234 Joined: 5-October 01 Member No.: 220 |
I tested 4.0 against 3.90.3 & 3.96.1 on only 3 problem samples but in all cases 4.0 sounded better, might be worth doing some testing
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 14:38
Post
#9
|
|
 Group: Members (Donating) Posts: 1336 Joined: 18-November 01 From: Celaya, Guanajuato Member No.: 478 |
QUOTE (OldSkoOL @ Mar 1 2005, 07:07 AM) I tested this out last night and was suprised how quick it encoded an mp3. It was at least twice as fast as 3.90.3, possible more. Is it written with SSE CPU optimization code built it or it utilising a new compression engine? The initial file output was much smaller but in comparison had a much lower bitrate for preset standard than 3.96.1. I'd like to know more info about this version so i know what to look out for. I'd like to start some hardcore testing LAME 3.97 is already twice as fast as 3.90 in my computer. Might be useful in doing some testing, but I think we should concentrate on 3.97 until Takehiro gives us the "go!" sign. -------------------- I'm the one in the picture, sitting on a giant cabbage in Mexico, circa 1978.
Reseņas de Rock en Espaņol: www.estadogeneral.com |
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 15:21
Post
#10
|
|
|
Rarewares admin Group: Members Posts: 7515 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Brazil Member No.: 81 |
QUOTE (AtaqueEG @ Mar 1 2005, 10:38 AM) Might be useful in doing some testing, but I think we should concentrate on 3.97 until Takehiro gives us the "go!" sign. Right. I remember Takehiro was mildly annoyed last time people jumped the gun and started madly speculating about lame 4. I hope people without any clue about LAME development won't go around announcing these pre-testing versions anymore. -------------------- Get up-to-date binaries of Lame, AAC, Vorbis and much more at RareWares:
http://www.rarewares.org |
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 21:09
Post
#11
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 1361 Joined: 25-November 02 Member No.: 3873 |
QUOTE (rjamorim @ Mar 1 2005, 06:21 AM) QUOTE (AtaqueEG @ Mar 1 2005, 10:38 AM) Might be useful in doing some testing, but I think we should concentrate on 3.97 until Takehiro gives us the "go!" sign. Right. I remember Takehiro was mildly annoyed last time people jumped the gun and started madly speculating about lame 4. I hope people without any clue about LAME development won't go around announcing these pre-testing versions anymore. there should be a password protection for the archive...something like "FOR TESTING ONLY" would be good
-------------------- --alt-presets are there for a reason! These other switches DO NOT work better than it, trust me on this.
LAME + Joint Stereo doesn't destroy 'Stereo' |
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 21:13
Post
#12
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 21 Joined: 22-February 05 Member No.: 20067 |
Thing is there seems to be no documentation or build notes/change logs surrounding this build. Which makes it quite hard to test and what to look our for.
For a start i dont even know who built it. And i was suprised to see it leap frog alpha 7 build and thread. 
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 21:17
Post
#13
|
|
|
Rarewares admin Group: Members Posts: 7515 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Brazil Member No.: 81 |
QUOTE (OldSkoOL @ Mar 1 2005, 05:13 PM) Thing is there seems to be no documentation or build notes/change logs surrounding this build. Which makes it quite hard to test and what to look our for. Quite simply, this version shouldn't be tested. At all. The developers aren't asking for it. So, you shouldn't be looking out for anything. Move on, people... leave LAME 4 alone until one of the devs asks for testing. -------------------- Get up-to-date binaries of Lame, AAC, Vorbis and much more at RareWares:
http://www.rarewares.org |
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 21:22
Post
#14
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 21 Joined: 22-February 05 Member No.: 20067 |
QUOTE (rjamorim @ Mar 1 2005, 02:17 PM) Move on, people... leave LAME 4 alone until one of the devs asks for testing. Definatly seems like the best suggestion. Is this the result of an open source project where the CVS can be accessed by anyone? Who are the respected active developers of this board? I see Gabriel mentioned a few times and his web site is very interesting
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 22:12
Post
#15
|
|
 LAME developer Group: Developer Posts: 761 Joined: 22-September 01 Member No.: 5 |
QUOTE (OldSkoOL @ Mar 1 2005, 09:22 PM) QUOTE (rjamorim @ Mar 1 2005, 02:17 PM) Move on, people... leave LAME 4 alone until one of the devs asks for testing. Definatly seems like the best suggestion. Is this the result of an open source project where the CVS can be accessed by anyone? Who are the respected active developers of this board? I see Gabriel mentioned a few times and his web site is very interesting http://lame.sourceforge.net/developers.html |
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 22:17
Post
#16
|
|
|
xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer Group: Developer Posts: 3708 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Bracknell, UK Member No.: 111 |
I can't believe the fuss this has generated!!!
 So, it's gone again!!
-------------------- John
---------------------------------------------------------------- My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/ |
|
|
|
|
Mar 1 2005, 23:05
Post
#17
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 36 Joined: 2-January 04 Member No.: 10877 |
Move Along, citizens. There's Nothing to See Here!
This post has been edited by BoNeLeSS: Mar 1 2005, 23:05 |
|
|
|
|
Mar 2 2005, 00:23
Post
#18
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 110 Joined: 31-December 03 Member No.: 10840 |
QUOTE (BoNeLeSS @ Mar 1 2005, 02:05 PM) Move Along, citizens. There's Nothing to See Here! Too late 
-------------------- Home: WavPack 4.4 Portable: Vorbis q5 (ao TuV b5)
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2005, 00:28
Post
#19
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 48 Joined: 21-July 02 Member No.: 2691 |
QUOTE (john33 @ Mar 1 2005, 10:17 PM) I can't believe the fuss this has generated!!! So, it's gone again!! 
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 15 2005, 15:44
Post
#20
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 727 Joined: 23-November 04 Member No.: 18295 |
QUOTE (john33 @ Mar 1 2005, 01:17 PM) I can't believe the fuss this has generated!!! So, it's gone again!!Looks like it's back up again with a suitable "FOR TESTING ONLY" warning. I know that I'm always interested to take a quick look (and listen) to these alpha compiles and get a feel for how the lame4 development is proceeding. I'm sure that many others similarly like to have a curious look and do so without making any fuss about it. So thanks to John33 for reinstating it.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 15 2005, 16:34
Post
#21
|
|
|
xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer Group: Developer Posts: 3708 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Bracknell, UK Member No.: 111 |
Before there are any other comments, this is there for your own appreciation only. Neither Takehiro, nor any of the other lame-devs, is directly interested in any testing you may do at this time.
There is no Change Log, or any other relevant documentation. LAME 4.0 is virtually a total rewrite, so little if any of the work done on 3.9x will go forward. So, have some fun with it, but don't even consider using it for any other purpose.
-------------------- John
---------------------------------------------------------------- My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/ |
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2005, 05:04
Post
#22
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 175 Joined: 16-January 03 Member No.: 4600 |
QUOTE (john33 @ Mar 15 2005, 07:34 AM) LAME 4.0 is virtually a total rewrite, so little if any of the work done on 3.9x will go forward. "Rewrite" is right. The 4.0 alpha is blazingly fast even compared with the 3.97 alphas, at least on my pc. Nice. Thanks john33 for putting it up again. these alphas are indeed a lot of fun to play with. This post has been edited by kindofblue: Mar 16 2005, 05:08 -------------------- WavPack 4.31 / LAME 3.98 alpha 3 -V9 -vbr-new
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2005, 15:34
Post
#23
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 21 Joined: 22-February 05 Member No.: 20067 |
At first its amazingly fast but then the fun ends.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2005, 15:54
Post
#24
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 3353 Joined: 6-July 03 From: Sachsen (DE) Member No.: 7609 |
QUOTE (john33 @ Mar 15 2005, 05:34 PM) LAME 4.0 is virtually a total rewrite, so little if any of the work done on 3.9x will go forward. If thats the case, then i wonder: Looking at the promising test-results of the upcoming 3.97, wouldn't it make sense - after 3.97 got finished - to say "okay, thats it - the 3.9x series reached its limits - now lets focus all efforts on lame4" ? I mean, if 3.97 turns out as good as it seems, then we would have a tuned, stable and good 3.97 - a perfect point to abandon the 3.9x series (except of possible bugfixes) and focus all energy on lame4 because all work on the 3.9x series cannot be "ported" to the future of lame(4). I'm kinda curious on whats the strategy of the lame-devs on this matter. - Lyx This post has been edited by Lyx: Mar 16 2005, 15:54 -------------------- I am arrogant and I can afford it because I deliver.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 16 2005, 17:05
Post
#25
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 410 Joined: 20-October 04 From: UK Member No.: 17750 |
QUOTE (Lyx @ Mar 16 2005, 02:54 PM) QUOTE (john33 @ Mar 15 2005, 05:34 PM) LAME 4.0 is virtually a total rewrite, so little if any of the work done on 3.9x will go forward. If thats the case, then i wonder: Looking at the promising test-results of the upcoming 3.97, wouldn't it make sense - after 3.97 got finished - to say "okay, thats it - the 3.9x series reached its limits - now lets focus all efforts on lame4" ? I mean, if 3.97 turns out as good as it seems, then we would have a tuned, stable and good 3.97 - a perfect point to abandon the 3.9x series (except of possible bugfixes) and focus all energy on lame4 because all work on the 3.9x series cannot be "ported" to the future of lame(4). I'm kinda curious on whats the strategy of the lame-devs on this matter. - Lyx Lyx - see this thread. I asked the very same thing. -------------------- http://www.health4ni.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 26th May 2013 - 07:58 |
