misc. topics; MP3 audio codecs, i-drive stuff etc. (56K modem users might want to look here)

Soccerman

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,378
0
0
ok first of all, have you heard of I-Drive? check it out! it's kindof like napster, only you don't download the file to your drive, it goes to a server instead. you can share this storage space with other people who have I-Drive easily (it just moves around on the hard drive that they use!), and you can access it anywhere..

I think this is a good idea, for things that you don't want to (or can't) carry with you when you're on the go.. it's plain useful for getting stuff off a server that goes on and off alot (for us 56k users, so we don't get cut off in the middle of a download).

now, about mp3 codecs.

first off, I just read a webpage that quite clearly showed that the Fraunhoffer codec doesn't compete as well in terms of quality as the Lame encoder anymore. here's the link


now, I'm not really concerned about creation of MP3 quality anymore (I've got that licked!). I'm wondering about playback quality.

as that article pointed out, there's an MP3 playback program called MP3123 that this guy uses. has anyone ever tried it?

he also mentions the quality of winamp and Sonique not being that good (yes he said SONIQUE).

finally, is there any way to get a LAME plugin for winamp so it uses that instead of the fraunhoffer or Nitrane codec (I have the old fraunhoffer codec, but don't use it becuase it uses alot of CPU time).
 

McCarthy

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,567
0
76
Just wanted to comment on the LAME/Fraun thing.

I agree, LAME is excellent for music bitrate mp3s, but for low stuff (~56 and lower) I still prefer Fraun. Admittedly the number of people doing things in 32/22 is vastly outnumbered by those doing 128/44, but for those who do encode spoken voice recordings and such, I'd suggest you still try both before picking which to go with.

--Mc
 

arthurb1

Golden Member
Oct 23, 1999
1,168
0
0
I want LAME, cause all mine is 128/160/256 at 44...all music...where can I get it and use it with Winamp...nitrane's shortcomings are glaring with these ProMedia's
 

Soccerman

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,378
0
0
I'm going to bump this..

ok, I just saw another review comparing LAME and Fraunhoffer as encoders, and though it seems to place Fraunhoffer 1st, it doesn't clearly show LAME's scores at higher bitrates (160+), so I don't trust it yet! besides it's somewhat old, as there are newere versions of LAME out already!

anywho, there was one graph
here at the middle-bottom of the page that compares all the codecs on an error to bitrate ratio.

basically, it says that at 128 kbit/second Fraunhoffer is the best (though this could have changed with newer versions of LAME!), however that's not as important as this. it shows that LAME, at ~230kbit/second beats fraunhoffer in the accuracy of the resulting audio file.

however, like I said before, this could EASILY have changed with newer versions of LAME. THIS might be why I see that discrepancy in the two reviews I have seen.
 

SSP

Lifer
Oct 11, 1999
17,727
0
0
I-drive is ok, but there are a lot of others that do the same thing (I had a link somewhere).

Oh, I-drive has a limit of 50MB storage space (or was it 100?). I used to use it all the time, but it was a hassle, and they turned off visitor downloads.
 

Fandu

Golden Member
Oct 9, 1999
1,341
0
0
Honestly, I trust the Ars guys alot more than a site that I've never heard of. Most of my collection is 160/192, and at those bitrates, all the comparisions I've seen show Fraunhoffer much better at those rates.
 

DeeK

Senior member
Mar 25, 2000
700
0
0
mpg123 is a Layer 1/2/3 decoder for Linux. He gave it a good rating because the decoders for LAME (lame --decode) and the Winamp mpg123 plugin (about the same CPU use as Nitrane, but better quality) use it. That's a little off, because LAME took mpg123 and took a bunch of bugs out of it before they incorporated the code into LAME. The debugged code is called mpglib. The Winamp mpg123 plugin uses mpglib, not mpg123.

Next, there are apparently a large number of variants of the Fraunhofer encoder out there. Not all are created equal.

Third, the Ars Technica review was done in March and used an old version of LAME (3.58). Quality has changed quite a bit since then.