Re: mp3 encoder?
Re: mp3 encoder?
- Subject: Re: mp3 encoder?
- From: "kris / krisgale.com" <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2006 11:58:32 -0500
LAME is one of the best i've come across.
use their quality 0 option (runs slow, but does the best band
probability/prediction), full stereo, and 256kbps is quite good enough (320
is just no necessary imho). do NOT use joint stereo.
for small-bandwidth applications, it's advisable not to go below 112kbps as
every encoder cuts the input signal from 44khz to 32khz at this point
(96kbps, 64kbps, etc.) and also in this case joint stereo will make more
'room' for frequency variance, so you lose some stereo image but you regain
some overall fidelity.
basically with LAME always use quality 0, anything more than that is just to
save you time waiting for the encoding job, but you lose signal. be
patient, let it analyze the audio fully.
----- Original Message -----
Hi. Which encoder you prefer when encoding mp3? Is Lame good enough and
easy to use?
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Coreaudio-api mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
| References: | |
| | >mp3 encoder? (From: stoyan panov <email@hidden>) |