Thanks to all who have responded. I have tried bladeenc and found it to be
extremely slow. My goatee was getting greyer by the minute.
Phil
P.S, Will try the link that Aaron has graciously provided hoping to get
more speed into the process.
At 01:26 PM 28/11/00 -0600, coder wrote:
>Here is a nice analysis of the current MP3 encoders available:
>
>http://www.airwindows.com/encoders/index.html
>
>Summary:
>- bladeenc and LAME are the best encoders for 128k and up, with 320K
>bladeenc leaving everything else behind.
>- LAME has an emphasis towards energy and high performance, bladeenc an
>emphasis towards tonal clarity and accuracy.
>
>hope you find it usefull.
>
>
>Aaron Malone wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 02:03:01PM +0000, BobTFish wrote:
> > > Bladeenc is not a great encoder. Better than the frauenhoffer one but for
> > > quality you want to use LAME or a derivative. Bladeenc puts *far* to much
> > > overring in your mp3s..
> >
> > Hear hear. Bladeenc is also extremely slow compared to other, better
> > encoders. My personal favorite is Gogo; however, checking the developer's
> > page, he seems to have stopped work on it. Oh well, you can grab a copy
> > of the latest version I have at http://munge.net/gogo236.tar.bz2 . Very
> > fast, and a nice psychoacoustic model to boot.
> >
> > --
> > Aaron Malone ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> > System Administrator "Never tell the truth to
> > Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. those unworthy of it."
> > http://www.semo.net -- Mark Twain
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > techtalk mailing list
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
>
>_______________________________________________
>techtalk mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
_______________________________________________
techtalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
