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: better Lame 3.98 (bitrate 128) or 3.93 (bitrate 192)? (Read 11867 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

better Lame 3.98 (bitrate 128) or 3.93 (bitrate 192)?

Reply #25
and I’m not sure why we’re spending time debating the philosophy of which pirate used hypothetically better encoding settings

better Lame 3.98 (bitrate 128) or 3.93 (bitrate 192)?

Reply #26
While probably pirated, there is actually no real evidence of it in the OP.

better Lame 3.98 (bitrate 128) or 3.93 (bitrate 192)?

Reply #27
I guess, although the presence of multiple file types in the second archive indicates sloppiness on behalf of either whoever collected the warez or the store that sold the files.

Anyway, it’s not my wish to pillory anyone, but neither do I want the site to be a service for judging others’ downloads – especially if they’re not kosher, but regardless of source, I don’t see much merit in guessing which set of encoding parameters is better when none of us have the same set of ears as the OP.