jalaffa Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 <img src="http://www.nsanedown.com/images/logos/lame.png" class="logo" alt="LAME" title="LAME" />Today, LAME is considered the best MP3 encoder at mid-high bitrates and at VBR, mostly thanks to the dedicated work of its developers and the open source licensing model that allowed the project to tap into engineering resources from all around the world. Both quality and speed improvements are still happening, probably making LAME the only MP3 encoder still being actively developed.<a href="http://www.nsanedown.com/?request=181566" target="_blank">Download</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanjoa Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 New addition? Nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jalaffa Posted October 16, 2011 Author Share Posted October 16, 2011 Kind of a new listing... (more precisely an old one being listed again) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jota.Ce Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 This is a musthave for every audio quality addict.I still resist to jump to FLAC, i don't even believe it deserves such a waste of bytes.So my choice will ever be MP3, at least until we can download a FLAC track in 1 second, and have a mp4 with 1TB of capacity.So... magnific news! And tons of thanks for this up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshall39 Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 If you listen to some classic music you see the difference between a MP3 encoded in 320 kbps and a FLAC in 800 kbps.I have a Cowon J3 music player with 64 go of memory and it's really enough mate you shouldn't resist! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toyo Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Lossless is indeed better than mp3, but you won't hear the difference on any headphones/speakers, you need something pretty HiFi or, even better, designed for monitoring, plus a trained ear. Even with all of these things in place, hearing the difference between lossless and properly encoded 320 kbps (and even V0) mp3 is HARD, probably bordering on impossible, not to mention that your mind plays tricks on you if you already know what you're listening to (and you think you hear differences, but it's a placebo phenomenon). There are blind studies around the webs that show this, and not even trained musicians couldn't tell the difference.But this difference increases as the mp3 bitrate decreases, becoming evident for 160 kbps or so even for untrained ears, given you listen to music on good speakers.I am still choosing FLAC though, whenever I can. I don't have a huge music collection as I only like few bands, so size is of no concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jota.Ce Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 I noted differences between CBR192 and VBR (lame preset standard, i think it's V2).But i can't note differences between CDA and 320, or CDA and lame preset extreme (i think it's V0). And i can talk about digital shop releases, not CDA->mp3 rips.People should be tested in a blind test. It's easy to talk knowing what's the exact bitrate.PS: My mp3 collection is 150GB, even i stopped download music 1.5 years ago. But i know people with more than 1TB, so... size maters here ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzalo76 Posted October 19, 2011 Share Posted October 19, 2011 Thank you for the news!This is a good LAME guide:http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=Recommended_LAME#Recommended_encoder_compiles_and_source_code Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.