winLAME prerelease 3 is out, a new winLAME version was just released Options

[vividos]

This release features updates to several libraries used (LAME 3.97b1, MAD 0.15.1b, Vorbis 1.1.2, libsndfile 1.0.12), and it was intensively tested so that winLAME produces the same output as the LAME command line tool.

winLAME is an encoder for several audio formats, including mp3 (MPEG Layer 3), Ogg Vorbis and more. winLAME lets you set up the encoding process with an easy-to-use wizard-style user interface.

winLAME Project homepage:
http://winLAME.sourceforge.net/

[sh1leshk4]

... so that winLAME produces the same output as the LAME command line tool.

It didn't?

This post has been edited by sh1leshk4: Dec 15 2005, 04:08

[kwanbis]

maybe you could provide information on when not.

[sh1leshk4]

maybe you could provide information on when not.

Who?
Me or vividos?

[Madrigal]

maybe you could provide information on when not.

Who?
Me or vividos?

Obviously vividos is meant.

Regards,
Madrigal

[Yaztromo]

maybe you could provide information on when not.

Who?
Me or vividos?

Obviously vividos is meant.

Regards,
Madrigal

I take it to mean sh1leshk4.

[Shade[ST]]

maybe you could provide information on when not.

Who?
Me or vividos?

Obviously vividos is meant.

Regards,
Madrigal

I take it to mean sh1leshk4.

Is there any point in sequential quoting?

[Synthetic Soul]

maybe you could provide information on when not.

Who?
Me or vividos?

Obviously vividos is meant.

Regards,
Madrigal

I take it to mean sh1leshk4.

Is there any point in sequential quoting?

It's a hideous trait.

BTW: I'm pretty sure kwanbis wsa directing the comment to vividos - but he was looking at sh1leshk4...

This has thus far got to be the most ridiculous thread I've ever seen. It's great.

[kwanbis]

... so that winLAME produces the same output as the LAME command line tool.

It didn't?

no it was directed at sh1leshk4, who sayd that "it didnt produce the same output".

[Synthetic Soul]

... so that winLAME produces the same output as the LAME command line tool.

It didn't?

no it was directed at sh1leshk4, who sayd that "it didnt produce the same output".

No, sh1leshk4 was querying whether it didn't previously.

By specifically stating "... that winLAME produces the same output as the LAME command line tool" the original text infers that previous versions didn't do this.

[Digga]

... so that winLAME produces the same output as the LAME command line tool.

It didn't?

no it was directed at sh1leshk4, who sayd that "it didnt produce the same output".

sh1leshk4's comment was directed to vividos himself or the community at a whole, seeking for confirmation. it was a short question in which he made clear he was surprised about the fact, that winLAME's output differed compared to CLI output until now.
in the beginning, there was only sound... ah, sorry, that's another story...

edit: all in all a beautiful piece of pseudo meta communication

This post has been edited by Digga: Dec 15 2005, 14:31

[pepoluan]

Can't help not to take part

,Dec 15 2005, 09:00 AM]

maybe you could provide information on when not.

Who?
Me or vividos?

Obviously vividos is meant.
Regards,
Madrigal

I take it to mean sh1leshk4.

Is there any point in sequential quoting?

It's a hideous trait.

BTW: I'm pretty sure kwanbis wsa directing the comment to vividos - but he was looking at sh1leshk4...

This has thus far got to be the most ridiculous thread I've ever seen. It's great.

So... ridiculous = great ... or are you just being sarcastic?

[kwanbis]

No, sh1leshk4 was querying whether it didn't previously.

By specifically stating "... that winLAME produces the same output as the LAME command line tool" the original text infers that previous versions didn't do this.

for me it means that previous versions could probably not produce the same with the new version of LAME ...

[Synthetic Soul]

So... ridiculous = great ... or are you just being sarcastic?

I'm not sure anymore... but I'm rapidly losing the will to live.

[vividos]

... so that winLAME produces the same output as the LAME command line tool.

It didn't?

Unfortunately it didn't. In LAME there is a comment that the developer can feed it any amount of audio samples for each call to the encode function. Testing showed that this was not the case, and I simply did was LAME.exe also did, namely feeding it as many audio samples as a mp3 frame can hold.

For this reason the previous versions of winLAME are not available anymore. prerelease3 is now the recommended winLAME version.

I of course appreciate getting comments and bug reports for winLAME.

[sh1leshk4]

This has to be the wackiest thread in HA that I've ever read...

Thanks for the reply, vividos.
Was the 'different result' resulted from a wrong implementation when calling the nLAME.dll or just 'cause of different version of nLAME.dll...?
(in fact, does it have anything to do w/ nLAME.dll...?)


[edit]

Some suggestions :

• When installing, could you make it possible to let users choose where the shortcut(s)'d be placed?
• Could you include a shortcut to uninstall winLAME?
• Regarding MP3 encoding, could you make it so users can input a custom, CLI-like, switches as some kind of an 'advanced' option?
• And probably an option to change the output's sample rate. =)
• Last but not least, the 'Open File' dialog.
  Is it possible to make winLAME display all of the files that it natively supports and those supported by Winamp's input plug-in when I choose 'All supported audio files'...?
  Current version (prerelease 3) only shows what winLAME natively supports.
  i.e when I want to transcode from .ofr, I have to specifically choose the corresponding format filter; otherwise I can't see the files.

Thanks before!

This post has been edited by sh1leshk4: Dec 15 2005, 19:21

[Madrigal]

So, what's the bottom line ?

Did it, or didn't it ?

EDIT: And perhaps more importantly, will it now, or won't it ?

Regards,
Madrigal

This post has been edited by Madrigal: Dec 15 2005, 20:13

[Synthetic Soul]

According to post #15 it didn't, and according to post #1 it does now.

I suppose whether it didn't is now just spilt milk - whether it does is for users to test I guess.

[sh1leshk4]

If only there's an explanation of what the difference was then I may be able to test it out.
But let's just wait 'til the guy's back. =)

[Shade[ST]]

So, what's the bottom line ?

Did it, or didn't it ?

EDIT: And perhaps more importantly, will it now, or won't it ?

Regards,
Madrigal

Whatever 'it', is. (NI!)

(Ok, let's stop being extravagant now)

This post has been edited by Shade[ST]: Dec 15 2005, 21:59

[Madrigal]

[amitpatel5000]

being in HA is always fun

(i actually saved this page so even after years i can read this and laugh)

Edited:

And I've given the name of the page as "ridiculous.htm"

This post has been edited by amitpatel5000: Dec 17 2005, 10:25

[vividos]

If only there's an explanation of what the difference was then I may be able to test it out.
But let's just wait 'til the guy's back. =)

I only did binary compares of produced files, so all I can say is that many bits in the mp3 stream were different. You probably have to test for yourself if there was a hearable difference.

by the way, why was this post not moved to the "validated news" forum so that it appears on the news page? I posted it under the "news submission" forum for this purpose?

This post has been edited by vividos: Dec 18 2005, 23:26

[56Nomad]

I of course appreciate getting comments and bug reports for winLAME.

I always enjoyed the Advanced mode of WinLame, being able to experiment with ABR/CBR/VBR, stereo/joint stereo, lopass filters, all that stuff. I'd make several versions of a track with different settings and let my ears decide.

Where did all the functionality go in the new version? I selected Custom settings and there's almost nothing there. Bummer.

[Vietwoojagig]

My Output Module List only Shows me
* LAME mp3 Encoder
* Ogg Vorbis Encoder
* WAV Output
* Windows Media Audio Encoder

But where is the AAC stuff?

Is it possible to add my Nero-Dll to WinLame?