Lowpass function accuracy in LAME? |
![]() ![]() |
Lowpass function accuracy in LAME? |
Feb 15 2003, 06:06
Post
#1
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 18 Joined: 20-April 02 Member No.: 1825 |
Hi All,
I was wondering - is the lowpass function used in LAME of a comparable quality to the ones used in Cool Edit Pro? I mean quality in terms of the amount of introduced noise and the reproduction of frequencies. Is it worthwhile for quality reasons to perform the lowpass function outside of LAME? Also, can anyone see anything wrong with the following for 192 CBR (I will exclude -k if lowpass inside lame is high quality)?: -b192 -m j -h -k --nspsytune -Z 1 -X 1,3 --athtype 2 --ns-bass -2 Which switches are unnecessary because they are default? RD. -------------------- *
The Probel with Troublems * |
|
|
|
Feb 15 2003, 15:53
Post
#2
|
|
![]() A/V Moderator Group: Members Posts: 317 Joined: 20-August 02 Member No.: 3123 |
The quality of the lowpass used by Cool Edit Pro is slighty better than the Lame one, but it's almost impossible to hear a difference.
You can hear differences only for a lowpass like 15000-16000 Hz, using a filter like Chebychev 2 (in CEP 2). And the for commandline, just use alt-preset CBR 192. This post has been edited by Oge_user: Feb 15 2003, 15:55 -------------------- [ Commodore 64 Forever...! ]
|
|
|
|
Feb 15 2003, 16:44
Post
#3
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 5 Joined: 6-February 03 From: Valencia Member No.: 4874 |
Don't worry about filtering. LAME has well implemented filters and when usign well designed digital filters is impossible to hear any difference.
|
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th June 2013 - 08:51 |