lame 3.98.4, 3.99 alpha, 32- and 64-bit builds Options

[obones]

I tried the x64 ACM codec as it includes an INF file this time but it crashes Vegas Pro so it seems it is not working.
Does anyone have any idea?

Well, still no luck here, but I found an interim solution as described here:

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=87076

But I would very much prefer using an ACM codec based on LAME, should one be available and usable. I don't have the skills to create one myself, but I can test an already built one if need be.

[john33]

Alpha 14 bundles are now at Rarewares.

[jamesbaud]

Just checked john33's compiled binary, the header is there.
Do you do anything special? How do you call LAME? How do you determine the existence of the header?

Both with Foobar2000 "-S --noreplaygain -V 2 - %d" and command line "lame.exe --noreplaygain -V 2 test.wav test.mp3"

In Foobar2000, it's not showing the ver of Lame used to encoder and EncSpot is showing Gogo 3.0 as encoder with the Lame Header showing just Xing Tag

I noticed this too. In prior versions of lame, prior versions of foobar would show the version of lame under the field "tool" in properties.

I don't know whether it's the version of lame (3.99 alpha 13 & 14) or the version of foobar (1.1.4 & 1.1.5) that's the problem.

Perhaps someone should notify the foobar people.

[Fishman0919]

Just checked john33's compiled binary, the header is there.
Do you do anything special? How do you call LAME? How do you determine the existence of the header?

Both with Foobar2000 "-S --noreplaygain -V 2 - %d" and command line "lame.exe --noreplaygain -V 2 test.wav test.mp3"

In Foobar2000, it's not showing the ver of Lame used to encoder and EncSpot is showing Gogo 3.0 as encoder with the Lame Header showing just Xing Tag

I noticed this too. In prior versions of lame, prior versions of foobar would show the version of lame under the field "tool" in properties.

I don't know whether it's the version of lame (3.99 alpha 13 & 14) or the version of foobar (1.1.4 & 1.1.5) that's the problem.

Perhaps someone should notify the foobar people.

It's not all Foobar... in alpha 13 and 14 the encoder short VersionString, which Foobar reads to show the ver used, was changed... older ver's of Lame were something like "LAME3.98r" now in Alpha 13 and 14 it's "L3.99a14". And it seems if Foobar doesn't see "LAME" it's doesn't think it Lame.

It seems, Foobar2000 assumes the "Encoder short VersionString" has to start with LAME.

This post has been edited by Fishman0919: Mar 2 2011, 06:46

[Fishman0919]

Where can I find an up to date ChangeLog for Lame?

[db1989]

If all else fails, you can browse the CVS tree and check the latest changes there:
http://lame.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/lame/lame/

[robert]

Sorry, I'll update the changelog later.

[Fishman0919]

If all else fails, you can browse the CVS tree and check the latest changes there:
http://lame.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/lame/lame/

Sorry, I'll update the changelog later.

Thank you and Thank you

[dxiv]

Is there a v3.98.4 modified lame_enc.dll to use .ini settings? The latest I see on rarewares is v3.98.2. Thanks.

[john33]

Is there a v3.98.4 modified lame_enc.dll to use .ini settings? The latest I see on rarewares is v3.98.2. Thanks.

Not currently, but I'll have a look at producing one. Given personal commitments, it will probably be some time next week, I'm afraid.

[dxiv]

Not currently, but I'll have a look at producing one.

Much obliged, thanks again.

[Fishman0919]

Lame 3.99a16 is available.

This post has been edited by Fishman0919: Apr 6 2011, 17:25

[john33]

Is there a v3.98.4 modified lame_enc.dll to use .ini settings? The latest I see on rarewares is v3.98.2. Thanks.

Now available at Rarewares.

[john33]

Lame 3.99a16 is available.

At Rarewares.

[Fishman0919]

Lame 3.99a16 is available.

At Rarewares.

Thank You!

[alter4]

Hi Guys!
What is the change list?

[IgorC]

I've tried 3.98.4 and 3.99a16 on EIG sample. V0

3.99 has higher bitrate for V0 but it's ok because it's highest VBR mode.
3.99a16 - 295 kbps
3.98.4 - 249 kbps.



And those extra bits were useful

ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.53a, 08 April 2011
Testname:

Tester: IgorC

1L = D:\Public test\Sample12\LAME 3.99a16 V0 VBR NEW sample12.wav
2R = D:\Public test\Sample12\LAME 3.98.4 V0 sample12.wav

Ratings on a scale from 1.0 to 5.0

---------------------------------------
General Comments:
---------------------------------------
1L File: D:\Public test\Sample12\LAME 3.99a16 V0 VBR NEW sample12.wav
1L Rating: 4.5
1L Comment: distortion in the form of flat/soft pulses during 2.75-3.15 seconds. But it's still better than sample 2.
---------------------------------------
2R File: D:\Public test\Sample12\LAME 3.98.4 V0 sample12.wav
2R Rating: 3.0
2R Comment: more pronounceable/ stronger pre-echo
---------------------------------------

ABX Results:
Original vs D:\Public test\Sample12\LAME 3.98.4 V0 sample12.wav
5 out of 5, pval = 0.031
Original vs D:\Public test\Sample12\LAME 3.99a16 V0 VBR NEW sample12.wav
5 out of 5, pval = 0.031


---- Detailed ABX results ----
Original vs D:\Public test\Sample12\LAME 3.98.4 V0 sample12.wav
Playback Range: 00.000 to 15.000
2:35:03 PM p 1/1 pval = 0.5
2:35:06 PM p 2/2 pval = 0.25
2:35:10 PM p 3/3 pval = 0.125
2:35:12 PM p 4/4 pval = 0.062
2:35:16 PM p 5/5 pval = 0.031

Original vs D:\Public test\Sample12\LAME 3.99a16 V0 VBR NEW sample12.wav
Playback Range: 00.000 to 15.000
2:38:32 PM p 1/1 pval = 0.5
2:38:38 PM p 2/2 pval = 0.25
2:38:43 PM p 3/3 pval = 0.125
2:38:50 PM p 4/4 pval = 0.062
2:38:57 PM p 5/5 pval = 0.031

This post has been edited by IgorC: Apr 8 2011, 18:53

[dxiv]

Is there a v3.98.4 modified lame_enc.dll to use .ini settings?

Now available at Rarewares.

Thank you.

P.S. Not directly related, but the hak/plextools entry seems to be outdated. Plextools Pro XL has been free since 2010, and v3.16 can be downloaded off Plextor's own site.

[john33]

Beta 0 compiles now at Rarewares.

[shadowking]

Still serious problems with this sample :

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=55340

[IgorC]

LAME 3.99b0 produces more obvious warbling on hi-hat and voice (or flanging?) than 3.98.4 does on this sample
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=88321


ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.53a, 23 April 2011
Testname:

Tester: IgorC

1R = D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.99b0 V5.wav
2R = D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.98.4 V5.7 original.wav

Ratings on a scale from 1.0 to 5.0

---------------------------------------
General Comments:
---------------------------------------
1R File: D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.99b0 V5.wav
1R Rating: 3.5
1R Comment:
---------------------------------------
2R File: D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.98.4 V5.7 original.wav
2R Rating: 4.0
2R Comment:
---------------------------------------

ABX Results:


Properties of Setup test: Additional offset 2000ms, gain is calculated.
Though V2 is pretty good and it's difficult to say the difference between two versions of LAME.

This post has been edited by IgorC: Apr 28 2011, 07:37

[Billytheonion]

IS V0 getting so high bit-rates to the point we can forget it ad just use 320 cbr

[Fishman0919]

LAME 3.99b0 produces more obvious warbling on hi-hat and voice (or flanging?) than 3.98.4 does on this sample
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=88321


ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.53a, 23 April 2011
Testname:

Tester: IgorC

1R = D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.99b0 V5.wav
2R = D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.98.4 V5.7 original.wav

Ratings on a scale from 1.0 to 5.0

---------------------------------------
General Comments:
---------------------------------------
1R File: D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.99b0 V5.wav
1R Rating: 3.5
1R Comment:
---------------------------------------
2R File: D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.98.4 V5.7 original.wav
2R Rating: 4.0
2R Comment:
---------------------------------------

ABX Results:


Properties of Setup test: Additional offset 2000ms, gain is calculated.
Though V2 is pretty good and it's difficult to say the difference between two versions of LAME.

IgorC, if you could, could you please repeat the test but with -V 5 --vbr-old for 3.99 b0... I found on a few samples/test I've done that when 3.99b0 -V # fails against 3.98.4... 3.99b0 -V # --vbr-old seemed better

This post has been edited by Fishman0919: Apr 28 2011, 17:40

[IgorC]

Yes, 3.99b0 VBR OLD was better than default VBR mode and was on par with 3.98.4.

It's very easy to spot the difference of Original vs Lossy. But the mind starts to play tricky games when it is Lossy A vs Lossy B. Especially when it's the same encoder and artifacts are very similar.
To avoid such tricky mind games I have done blind test in two passes.
1.Exclusively ABC/HR + training mode. During this pass I put the mark to encoders (1.0 - 5.0).
2. Exclusively ABXY of Lossy A vs Lossy B. ABXY works better than ABX for similar artifacts.


ABC/HR log:
ABC/HR for Java, Version 0.53a, 28 April 2011
Testname:

Tester: IgorC

1R = D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.99b0 V5.wav
2L = D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.99b0 V5 VBR OLD.wav

Ratings on a scale from 1.0 to 5.0

---------------------------------------
General Comments:
---------------------------------------
1R File: D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.99b0 V5.wav
1R Rating: 2.8
1R Comment:
---------------------------------------
2L File: D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.99b0 V5 VBR OLD.wav
2L Rating: 3.3
2L Comment:
---------------------------------------

ABX Results:



ABX log:
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.6
2011/04/28 22:26:02

File A: D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.99b0 V5 VBR OLD.mp3
File B: D:\Artifacts_Training\A matter of time\3.99b0 V5.mp3

22:26:02 : Test started.
22:28:28 : 01/01 50.0%
22:28:34 : 02/02 25.0%
22:29:00 : 03/03 12.5%
22:29:04 : 04/04 6.3%
22:29:16 : 05/05 3.1%
22:29:35 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 5/5 (3.1%)

[The Sheep of DEA...]

Where can I find a source tarball for 3.99b0?