IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

9 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Closed TopicStart new topic
lame 3.98.4, 3.99 alpha, 32- and 64-bit builds
tsnr
post Mar 23 2010, 06:45
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 23-March 10
Member No.: 79241



LAME 3.98.4
download (mediafire)

LAME 3.99 alpha 3
download (mediafire)


Win32:
lame.exe - the command line encoder, used from the Windows command shell
lame_enc.dll - LAME encoding library, generally used with CD rippers, etc
lame.acm - windows acm codec.

x64:
lame64.exe
lame_enc64.dll
lame64.acm

Bundle compiled with Intel Compiler 11.1.060.

smile.gif

This post has been edited by tsnr: Mar 23 2010, 07:12
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post Mar 23 2010, 07:35
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



QUOTE (tsnr @ Mar 23 2010, 07:45) *
LAME 3.98.4
download (mediafire)

LAME 3.99 alpha 3
download (mediafire)


Win32:
lame.exe - the command line encoder, used from the Windows command shell
lame_enc.dll - LAME encoding library, generally used with CD rippers, etc
lame.acm - windows acm codec.

x64:
lame64.exe
lame_enc64.dll
lame64.acm

Bundle compiled with Intel Compiler 11.1.060.

smile.gif


scam?

(Edit: full quote to protect against possible edits by OP)

This post has been edited by Alex B: Mar 23 2010, 08:08


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tsnr
post Mar 23 2010, 07:53
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 23-March 10
Member No.: 79241














Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Larson
post Mar 23 2010, 07:58
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 131
Joined: 27-March 09
Member No.: 68422



Thank you so much smile.gif how can I get lame x64 to work with dbpoweramp? sorry for the noob question
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post Mar 23 2010, 08:24
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



At HA the OP is noobier than you. Let's see if the OP provides support for the release.

EDIT

http://www.virustotal.com didn't find anything scary in the exe files. Only "Symantec 20091.2.0.41, 2010.03.23" thinks that the files are suspicous.

This post has been edited by Alex B: Mar 23 2010, 08:34


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TechVsLife
post Mar 23 2010, 08:26
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 195
Joined: 29-May 07
Member No.: 43837



QUOTE (Larson @ Mar 23 2010, 02:58) *
Thank you so much smile.gif how can I get lame x64 to work with dbpoweramp? sorry for the noob question

I believe that you can't use a 64 bit dll/exe from within a 32 bit program (dbpoweramp is 32-bit) -- at least not easily (in any case you probably wouldn't see advantages from the switching/thunking). (The 64-bit release of dbpoweramp is supposed to be rel. 15 or so.)
p.s. this is a pure guess but you might be able to hardcode and call a 64-bit cmd.exe batch using the cli encoder, but I doubt it would work b/c dbpoweramp interfaces with it and probably calls 32-bit cmd there (I haven't tried).


This post has been edited by TechVsLife: Mar 23 2010, 08:36
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post Mar 23 2010, 08:32
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



I sent also the acm and dll files to virustotal. The results are the same as earlier. The files appear to be clean, except that Symantec found them suspicious.

This post has been edited by Alex B: Mar 23 2010, 08:44


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tsnr
post Mar 23 2010, 09:07
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 23-March 10
Member No.: 79241



QUOTE (Alex B @ Mar 23 2010, 16:32) *
I sent also the acm and dll files to virustotal. The results are the same as earlier. The files appear to be clean, except that Symantec found them suspicious.

I do not know, why are the results from Symantec's.




I'm using Avast Pro 4.8.1368 (vps: 100322-0), Windows XP x64 SP2.







Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bodhi
post Mar 23 2010, 09:28
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 261
Joined: 10-June 06
Member No.: 31712



No problem with NOD32.
But I'll wait...
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
PeterJvM
post Mar 23 2010, 10:07
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 15-July 09
From: Fethiye
Member No.: 71494



QUOTE (Bodhi @ Mar 23 2010, 10:28) *
No problem with NOD32.
But I'll wait...


Very wise since on sourcefoge.net you can find this:
Latest LAME release: v3.98.3 (February 2010)

This post has been edited by PeterJvM: Mar 23 2010, 10:08


--------------------
Stpuid questions do not exist.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Larson
post Mar 23 2010, 10:21
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 131
Joined: 27-March 09
Member No.: 68422



it's untrue,on lame website and sourceforge.net is already present the 3.98.4 version

http://sourceforge.net/projects/lame/files/lame/

This post has been edited by Larson: Mar 23 2010, 10:21
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Steve Forte Rio
post Mar 23 2010, 11:03
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 432
Joined: 4-October 08
From: Ukraine
Member No.: 59301



From changelog:

QUOTE
Robert Hegemann
Fix for Bugtracker item [ 2973877 ] A problem regarding the new drain code


But what a problem was??
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bodhi
post Mar 23 2010, 11:06
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 261
Joined: 10-June 06
Member No.: 31712



QUOTE (Steve Forte Rio @ Mar 23 2010, 11:03) *
But what a problem was??

QUOTE
Hi,

I'll release LAME 3.98.4 soon, because of a bug in 3.98.3, which may result
in a malformed bitstream sometimes (mostly high bitrate CBR). (Bugs item #2973877)
Has anyone else something that needs to get fixed before a 3.98-branch release?

Ciao Robert
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
GeSomeone
post Mar 23 2010, 12:23
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 920
Joined: 22-October 01
From: the Netherlands
Member No.: 335



So now the smoke has cleared ... thanks for the heads-up (and the quick compile) tsnr.


--------------------
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Mar 23 2010, 13:25
Post #15


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3726
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



A full set of win 32 builds of 3.98.4 is now at Rarewares as is the 3.99a3 bundle. smile.gif


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
robert
post Mar 23 2010, 14:03
Post #16


LAME developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 783
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 5



Btw. I would welcome some feedback on the unicode filename problematic. Prior to 3.99, filenames with unicode characters, that are not represented in 8-bit code pages, didn't work with LAME. I hope that 3.99 solves it. It would be nice, if windows users with non-latin1 character code pages could test it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post Mar 23 2010, 14:14
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



Regarding Rarewares, the server may not work correctly at the moment.

The addresses:
http://rarewares.org/
http://www.rarewares.org/
- do not open the home page. No error message is displayed. The browser window stays empty.

The addresses:
http://rarewares.org/index.php
http://www.rarewares.org/index.php
- work normally.

I tested this with Firefox, Opera and I.E. Can anyone else confirm the problem?

This post has been edited by Alex B: Mar 23 2010, 14:17


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Larson
post Mar 23 2010, 14:26
Post #18





Group: Members
Posts: 131
Joined: 27-March 09
Member No.: 68422



I confirm the rarewares problem too!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bodhi
post Mar 23 2010, 14:58
Post #19





Group: Members
Posts: 261
Joined: 10-June 06
Member No.: 31712



Same for me but I use this address
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Steve Forte Rio
post Mar 23 2010, 15:06
Post #20





Group: Members
Posts: 432
Joined: 4-October 08
From: Ukraine
Member No.: 59301



So, what compile should I use? Posted by the topic starter or downloaded from rarewares? o.O

This post has been edited by Steve Forte Rio: Mar 23 2010, 15:20
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Mar 23 2010, 15:52
Post #21


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3726
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



QUOTE (Alex B @ Mar 23 2010, 13:14) *
Regarding Rarewares, the server may not work correctly at the moment.

The addresses:
http://rarewares.org/
http://www.rarewares.org/
- do not open the home page. No error message is displayed. The browser window stays empty.

The addresses:
http://rarewares.org/index.php
http://www.rarewares.org/index.php
- work normally.

I tested this with Firefox, Opera and I.E. Can anyone else confirm the problem?

This should now be resolved, I think! wink.gif


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post Mar 23 2010, 15:58
Post #22





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



It works now. Thanks.


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Mar 23 2010, 16:01
Post #23


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3726
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



QUOTE (Alex B @ Mar 23 2010, 14:58) *
It works now. Thanks.

Thank you kindly. smile.gif


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Steve Forte Rio
post Mar 23 2010, 16:58
Post #24





Group: Members
Posts: 432
Joined: 4-October 08
From: Ukraine
Member No.: 59301



Can someone tell me why I'm getting different audiostreams with compiles by tsnr and john33??

QUOTE
Differences found: 4389914 sample(s), starting at 2.1563265 second(s), peak: 0.0983066 at 149.9082993 second(s), 2ch


Also encoding is about 1.5x faster with tsnr's compile blink.gif

Parameters (foobar2000):

--silent -b 320 -q 0 --noreplaygain - %d
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Mar 23 2010, 17:44
Post #25





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5146
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



Different compilers produce different code. Different code may perform computations slightly differently, producing slightly different results, and/or be faster.

Edit: After john33's post, I realised that I should have mentioned that any such differences are almost certainly infinitesimal.

This post has been edited by dv1989: Mar 23 2010, 18:02
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

9 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th April 2014 - 22:49