:mad: Is there some way to remove that Gogo encoder from the web? I have come across a lot of music encoded with Gogo and its just crap, plain and simple. While we worry about the finer points of Lame 2.92, this piece of garbage mutilates songs such that 128 CBR can sound like music from a cheap stereo with damaged torn speakers and intermittent channels. Yah, thats progress (maybe the RIAA put this one on the market).

Please use Lame or whatever, anything except Gogo, which is Crapcrap.:mad:

Gogo's main focus isn't quality, it's speed, and in that regard it does what it's supposed to. I believe the new Gogo is built off of Lame v3.87 (the readme is probably more specific), and while its performance may not be quite as great as the old Gogo, its quality is a big improvement. I could be totally off-base here, but I think Gogo's -b128 should sound just like Lame3.87's -b128, for example. Gogo probably doesn't implement the more advanced, higher quality Lame modes, though.

If you want to target an MP3 encoder for total annihilation, I recommend Xing

Is there some way to remove stupids from the web?

Yeah right. Use BladeEnc instead (gives you "CD Qualitiy" at 128 CBR).

According to the GoGo No Coda website and sources, it seems GoGo v3.10 is based on LAME 3.9x code, so I don't see if there could be much of a quality drop. Unless they really sacrificed quality for speed.

Cheers
AgentMil

Some people like hardware compatibility like DVD players, Discman, etc. Anyway I think right now its either Mp3 for (compatibility/size) or MPC (quality/size)

You're right. But i think you need some times to re-encode your CDs to Vorbis.
When you'll finish your mobile device will support Vorbis

Nonsense. Gogo is Lame with heavy optimizations. The main routines were rewritten in Assembly and there are lots of processor dispatches, and SIMD code (MMX, 3Dnow!, SSE...)

Gogo 2.29 indeed had bad quality. It was based on Lame 3.29 (including a part of Lame 3.5x ).

If you use Lame 3.29, you will get the same quality.

Gogo 3.x is based on Lame 3.88 + parts of Lame 3.9x

Anything except Gogo, eh? I, for sure, wouldn't exchange Gogo for Xing. Or Blade. Or SoloH. Or Scmpx. Or QDesign.

Regards;

Roberto.

So, in your opinion, using MP3 is stupid?

I wonder who's the real stupid here.

Why don't they start developing LAME as Gogo and distribute it on an english website? The encoder obviously shows the potential for high quality AND speed.

Gogo v3 is not that bad. It is right that quality is lowered compared to Lame, but the difference is not that huge.
(please note that gogo is using gpsycho and not nspsytune).
Sometimes speed is good...

Yes, Gogo 3.xx is a far to be catastrophic.
LAME is a very good codec. But it doesn't mean that the lame encodings are all good. It's easy to ruin quality by a stupid command line.
-b 128 -m s -lowpass 22050 -k -q 9 [some people are convinced that -q 9 > -q 0, just because 9>0...] is enough to compete with Gogo 2, plugger or shine. So must we remove LAME from the web ?