LAME 3.97 Final vs LAME 3.98.2 |
  |
LAME 3.97 Final vs LAME 3.98.2 |
 May 27 2009, 00:25
Post
#1
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 27-May 09 Member No.: 70149  |
Hi, I just joined the forum and was wondering if anyone could help me out. I have heard that Lame 3.97 final is the best version from Lame but the posts seem to be old. Is it still better than the newer versions out there now? Also, I have downloaded & extracted the 3.97tar version from soundforge (is that the right one?) but can't seem to be able to find the lame.exe file or even install it. Please help?
|
 |
 
|
|
May 27 2009, 00:31
Post
#2
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 867 Joined: 19-May 08 Member No.: 53637 |
http://www.rarewares.org/mp3-lame-bundle.php#lame-current
terry Edit: I am not aware of any reason to not stay current and there are plenty of threads for you to read regarding this. This post has been edited by tpijag: May 27 2009, 00:34 |
|
|
|
|
May 27 2009, 11:25
Post
#3
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 1744 Joined: 9-October 05 From: Dormagen, Germany Member No.: 25015 |
3.98 gives the more homogenously good results throughout the musical spectrum.
-------------------- lossyWAV -P --altpreset | FLAC -8 (350 kbps)
|
|
|
|
|
May 27 2009, 21:40
Post
#4
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 27-May 09 Member No.: 70149 |
Do you think you can elaborate Halb 27? I didn't understand homogenously?
|
|
|
|
|
May 27 2009, 21:46
Post
#5
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 2478 Joined: 2-September 02 Member No.: 3264 |
QUOTE (D922922 @ May 27 2009, 16:40)  Do you think you can elaborate Halb 27? I didn't understand homogenously? It means "consistent" or "similar in different places". Hes saying it works better overall. |
|
|
|
|
May 27 2009, 23:03
Post
#6
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 1744 Joined: 9-October 05 From: Dormagen, Germany Member No.: 25015 |
Sorry for misspelling 'homogeneously'.
This post has been edited by halb27: May 27 2009, 23:10 -------------------- lossyWAV -P --altpreset | FLAC -8 (350 kbps)
|
|
|
|
|
May 28 2009, 00:44
Post
#7
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 658 Joined: 26-October 05 From: Various networks Member No.: 25371 |
QUOTE (D922922 @ May 27 2009, 15:40) Do you think you can elaborate Halb 27? I didn't understand homogenously? Just use the latest stable version and don't worry about anything others. -------------------- EAC>1)fb2k>LAME3.97 -V 0 --vbr-new>WMP11 2)MAC-Extra High
|
|
|
|
|
May 31 2009, 22:51
Post
#8
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 68 Joined: 3-January 07 From: Texas Member No.: 39241 |
QUOTE 3.98 gives the more homogenously good results throughout the musical spectrum. This reminded me of a saying: Don't use a big word where a diminutive one will suffice. 
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 3 2009, 01:10
Post
#9
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 27-May 09 Member No.: 70149 |
Thanks everyone for the info!
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 3 2009, 03:51
Post
#10
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 344 Joined: 8-December 01 From: Indiana, U.S.A. Member No.: 608 |
QUOTE (antman @ May 31 2009, 17:51) QUOTE 3.98 gives the more homogenously good results throughout the musical spectrum. This reminded me of a saying: Don't use a big word where a diminutive one will suffice. Therefore, ditch diminutive and use small. Regards, Madrigal |
|
|
|
|
Jun 3 2009, 15:04
Post
#11
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 639 Joined: 23-November 04 Member No.: 18295 |
QUOTE (Madrigal @ Jun 2 2009, 19:51) QUOTE (antman @ May 31 2009, 17:51) QUOTE 3.98 gives the more homogenously good results throughout the musical spectrum. This reminded me of a saying: Don't use a big word where a diminutive one will suffice. Therefore, ditch diminutive and use small. Regards, Madrigal Hmmm, I think it was supposed to be a joke. |
|
|
|
|
Jun 3 2009, 16:18
Post
#12
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 344 Joined: 8-December 01 From: Indiana, U.S.A. Member No.: 608 |
QUOTE (uart @ Jun 3 2009, 10:04) QUOTE (Madrigal @ Jun 2 2009, 19:51) QUOTE (antman @ May 31 2009, 17:51) QUOTE 3.98 gives the more homogenously good results throughout the musical spectrum. This reminded me of a saying: Don't use a big word where a diminutive one will suffice. Therefore, ditch diminutive and use small. Regards, Madrigal Hmmm, I think it was supposed to be a joke. Maybe. At least now we've covered the possibility that it wasn't. Regards, Madrigal |
|
|
|
|
Jun 3 2009, 17:01
Post
#13
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 639 Joined: 23-November 04 Member No.: 18295 |
I think it was a fairly obvious joke actually.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony This post has been edited by uart: Jun 3 2009, 17:03 |
|
|
|
|
Jun 3 2009, 19:12
Post
#14
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 1744 Joined: 9-October 05 From: Dormagen, Germany Member No.: 25015 |
Well, I think we should stop that.
antman is right in saying that we should explain things in simple terms (though apart from misspelling I'm not sure if this really applies to what I wrote, but I don't want to argue about it). Madrigal pointed out the fact that antman himself didn't use simple terms which had it's irony. But I think all is said now. This post has been edited by halb27: Jun 3 2009, 19:14 -------------------- lossyWAV -P --altpreset | FLAC -8 (350 kbps)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd November 2009 - 09:01 |
