lame 3.98.4, 3.99 alpha, 32- and 64-bit builds |
![]() ![]() |
lame 3.98.4, 3.99 alpha, 32- and 64-bit builds |
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. This post has been edited by tsnr: Mar 23 2010, 07:12 |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 07:35
Post
#2
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1303 Joined: 14-September 05 From: Helsinki, Finland Member No.: 24472 |
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. 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
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 07:53
Post
#3
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 23-March 10 Member No.: 79241 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 07:58
Post
#4
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 130 Joined: 27-March 09 Member No.: 68422 |
Thank you so much
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 08:26
Post
#6
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 195 Joined: 29-May 07 Member No.: 43837 |
Thank you so much 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 |
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 09:07
Post
#8
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 23-March 10 Member No.: 79241 |
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. |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 09:28
Post
#9
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 259 Joined: 10-June 06 Member No.: 31712 |
No problem with NOD32.
But I'll wait... |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 10:07
Post
#10
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 15-July 09 From: Fethiye Member No.: 71494 |
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.
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 10:21
Post
#11
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 130 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 |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 11:03
Post
#12
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 373 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?? |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 11:06
Post
#13
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 259 Joined: 10-June 06 Member No.: 31712 |
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 |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 12:23
Post
#14
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 913 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.
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 13:25
Post
#15
|
|
![]() xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer Group: Developer Posts: 3706 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.
-------------------- John
---------------------------------------------------------------- My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/ |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 14:03
Post
#16
|
|
![]() LAME developer Group: Developer Posts: 761 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.
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 14:26
Post
#18
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 130 Joined: 27-March 09 Member No.: 68422 |
I confirm the rarewares problem too!
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 14:58
Post
#19
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 259 Joined: 10-June 06 Member No.: 31712 |
Same for me but I use this address
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 15:06
Post
#20
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 373 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 |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 15:52
Post
#21
|
|
![]() xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer Group: Developer Posts: 3706 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Bracknell, UK Member No.: 111 |
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! -------------------- John
---------------------------------------------------------------- My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/ |
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 16:01
Post
#23
|
|
![]() xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer Group: Developer Posts: 3706 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Bracknell, UK Member No.: 111 |
-------------------- John
---------------------------------------------------------------- My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/ |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 16:58
Post
#24
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 373 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 Parameters (foobar2000): --silent -b 320 -q 0 --noreplaygain - %d |
|
|
|
Mar 23 2010, 17:44
Post
#25
|
|
|
Group: Super Moderator Posts: 4333 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 |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 19th May 2013 - 22:58 |