What is the best ver. of LAME?
May 31, 2004 at 2:37 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 8

sporky

Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 19, 2003
Posts
84
Likes
0
I'm currently using 3.90.2, and it serves me just fine. I've been hearing that 3.90.3 is what most people use. Is it worth upgrading?

Thanks
 
May 31, 2004 at 3:04 AM Post #2 of 8
YES!

I think that particular version, 3.90.3, is the most heavily tuned and tested version of LAME. However, there is a newer version which is dramatically faster: 3.96. It is much faster than 3.90.3 but it does have a few bugs which still need to be ironed out. They are currently field testing the 3.97 Alpha 1 version.
 
May 31, 2004 at 5:22 AM Post #6 of 8
Sorry to kick a dead (well, it will be soon) horse, but quick rundown on the version numbers...

3.90.x is the heavily tweaked versions that are [generally] designed to sound best with the --alt-preset modes. 3.9x are the bone stock ones that have the most cutting edge technology, hence, why they're faster, but also have more bugs, and sometimes, not as good SQ.

I myself use 3.90.3, FWIW.

(-:Stephonovich:)
 
Jun 1, 2004 at 8:49 AM Post #7 of 8
3.90.x vs 3.96 (or later).

The jury is still out on this.

On some samples 3.90.X variants win (perceptually), but on others 3.96 does.

There's an ongoing discussion about this in the Hydrogenaudio forums, if you're interested.

I'm using 3.96 myself, because it is insanely fast and because I'd like to help with the development by submitting info on problem samples for the code that is in active development.
 
Jun 1, 2004 at 9:36 PM Post #8 of 8
Quote:

Originally Posted by halcyon
3.90.x vs 3.96 (or later).

The jury is still out on this.

On some samples 3.90.X variants win (perceptually), but on others 3.96 does.

There's an ongoing discussion about this in the Hydrogenaudio forums, if you're interested.

I'm using 3.96 myself, because it is insanely fast and because I'd like to help with the development by submitting info on problem samples for the code that is in active development.



LAME version 3.96 is insanely fast! It must be at least five times faster on my old, slow, and clunky Toshiba Satellite notebook. However, I think that whenever the LAME developers get some time this summer they should take a good hard look at 3.96 and address some concerns about errors in the code. Perhaps they need to test 3.96 fully and issue 3.96.1 or something like that before they go for the big version 4.0.
icon10.gif
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top