From: Rogério B. <rb...@im...> - 2011-02-27 16:26:37
|
Hi, Robert. On Feb 24 2011, Robert Hegemann wrote: > I think the development of v399 will approach beta status in March. Thanks for the reminder. I couldn't do almost anything planned this week, since my soon-to-be wife decided that we should be moving home and, as you can guess, that's a huge amount of small problems. > Currently I'm checking the resulting bitrates of VBR settings. > Therefore I've encoded my CDs (6556 songs, ~3 weeks of music) at > the following levels: > n: avg. kbps > ============== > 0: 260.8 > 1: 223.550 > 2: 190.006 > 3: 180.059 (*) > 4: 149.903 > 5: 129.861 > 6: 114.239 (+) > 7: 98.9858 (+) > 8: 79.5106 > 9: 59.1422 (*) > > Some are a bit too far away (*) from what I wanted them to be, > and others (+) a little bit too high, but acceptable. A little bit > of fine-tuning will fix that. What bitrates do you want to achieve, in particular? Something like: | n | avg. kbps | |---+-----------| | 0 | 256 | | 1 | 224 | | 2 | 192 | | 3 | 160 | | 4 | ?? | | 5 | 128 | | 6 | 112 | | 7 | 96 | | 8 | 64 | | 9 | 48 | With this moving of mine, I will quite probably be ripping a lot of my collection and be encoding stuff. I can report what I have as a result. My collection mostly has heavy metal stuff, which should, in some sense, suffer from bloat of the sfb21 problem. :-/ (Especially Black Metal stuff with lots of high frequencies). > Another topic right now is, CBR/ABR encoding was reported of being > not so good, as of lately. As a quick fix they are using the VBR > psy model. Adapting the internal parameters to make the best use > of it is somethings I'll have to do next. I see that you changed the vbr methods back and forth from/to vbr-mtrh, right? BTW, could we have a brief paragraph on how the methods differ? If I understand it correctly, MT and RH are suposed to be the initials of Mark Taylor and Robert Hegemann, right? :-) > One thing that would be nice to have in 3.99 is, fixing the problem that > the shared libraries do export a lot of internal stuff. Like the Windows > DLL, the dynamic link library should export symbols from lame.h only. This means that, since we are changing the API, we should have to bump the library SONAME, right? Regards, Rogério Brito. -- Rogério Brito : rbrito@{ime.usp.br,gmail.com} : GPG key 4096R/BCFCAAAA http://rb.doesntexist.org : Packages for LaTeX : algorithms.berlios.de DebianQA: http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=rbrito%40ime.usp.br |