View Full Version : Digimedia soulmate

10-28-2002, 02:37 PM
Any chance of adding the Soulmate to the supported players please?

10-28-2002, 04:35 PM
I would like to see FhG's free Fastenc to be added to the codec list. That would be great just because of the fact that FhG's VBR is far better than any mp3 type format on the PLANET!


10-29-2002, 08:26 AM
Good troll....

Do you have any information / statistics / analysis to support your affirmation concerning the quality of your encoder ?

Thank you.

10-29-2002, 08:33 AM
Are you dumb? Have you really not heard of the Fraunhofer Institut? The Inventors of the MP3 Format? The current Top of the line Encoder that LAME is always comparing to(and will soon be better than maybe)

FastEnc is the latest encoder from the creators of the MP3 format. It is now very fast and features variable bitrate encoding. Its quality is VERY GOOD. A must have.

10-29-2002, 08:42 AM
LAME v3.92 April 14 2002

Quality is comparable to FhG encoding engines and substantially better than most other encoders. (LAME IS GREAT)

for people with mp3 players FhG sounds better below the bit rate(128 kbps)

Don't belive me.. try it out for yourself


Encode something at 64 kbps or Even 56 (havn't went below that yet)

10-29-2002, 08:46 AM
I know FhG, thanks.

The point is
"FhG's VBR is far better than any mp3 type format on the PLANET!".

It is not because FhG is the creators of the MP3 format that their product are the best (a lot of bugs in the past show this).

The question was simple, what is the proof/studies/analysis that show that fastenc is better than Lame ?


10-29-2002, 08:51 AM
I wasn't even talking anything about LAME in the first place.

10-29-2002, 08:55 AM
The reason i can't give you any audio tests is because none of them are fair at the moment. Either they are using the newest version of fastenc and Lame 3.87 or an old version of fastenc and lame 3.90

I'll keep looking though

10-30-2002, 02:39 AM
FHG is superior with sub 128Kbit/s bitrates compared to LAME. Everything else, including VBR, Lame is superior with. Even when FHG used to be better with CBR, Lame has dominated in the VBR side of things for ages. It's only been the last year to two years where Lame has surpassed FHG in CBR.

FHG based MP3 codecs have always been weak with VBR & joint stereo. These days FHG doesn't compare quality-wise to Lame.

10-30-2002, 03:10 AM
Thank you for this details.

I have a question for you :

I just use couple of days to re rip all my CD with the r3mix preset, thinking it was the best preset. But, regarding your (older) post, you have said that alt standard preset was better.

Can you please explain or giveto me an URL witch explain me the quality differance between this two preset ?

Do I have to rip all again ?

An other question, did dMC Audio Cd Input correct CD read error with efficiency ? (as CDPARANOIA for exemple).

Thank you !

10-30-2002, 05:46 AM
The main areas where Alt Preset Standard is better than r3mix quality-wise is that it has better and more tested noise shaping algorhythms, uses --nssafejoint which ensures that no potential stereo separation problems can occur at all while still using Joint Stereo. It's also had far more testing on many different types of songs from many different people. Alt-Presets Standard is also a far more sophisticated preset that has undergone many (nearly countless) code-level tweaks just for itself that cannot be used in any other form, r3mix has not. It's just a pretty large group of switches (settings) put together by an intelligent user, not a developer who helps to tune Lame like in the alt-presets' case.

For more info on the alt-presets, look here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/)

Do I have to rip all again ?

Certainly not. Only if you can hear quality degradation on your equipment. alt-preset will usually produce similar sized files to r3mix, though it does encode slower. A plus side with alt-preset is that since it has good noise shaping, it doesn't bloat out and produce really high bitrates with Heavy Metal music like with r3mix.

An other question, did dMC Audio Cd Input correct CD read error with efficiency ? (as CDPARANOIA for exemple).

Not yet. DMC does not support secure Audio CD ripping. In other words, it doesn't perform as well as with scratched CDs as it could.

10-30-2002, 11:24 AM
I have been investigating secure ripping, my conclusion yes it is better than nothing, but it is not what it is cracked up to be.

Even with EAC and c2 error detection, most drives will let the error slip through.

I am formulating a better solution to the problem, I am keeping quiet about it just now, but it will guarentee a 100% error free rip, where EAC and CDEX will not.

10-30-2002, 12:03 PM
Thank you !

Is that possible to put a counter that shows read errors ?

Like that the user will know if he have make a perfect rip, or if he have to clean the cd, clean lens,... ?

10-30-2002, 01:38 PM
The only way to do this is to write your own C2 error detection, and read the sublayers directly. No audio ripper I know of does this. EAC can say there are 0 errors, when really there are 100...

When I get around to it, it will be 100% accurate.

08-02-2003, 08:25 PM
1) Does dBpowerAMP Audio Player (dAP) support FastEncc ( full console version: http://www.geocities.com/fastenc/ ) ? I'd like to use it to compress 80kbps CBR / 32KHz MP3s, because I think for low bitrates FASTEnc is still better than LAME ?!
Alternatively, I could use MP3Enc, which is not cheap at all :-)

2) I think, it would be great if dbpowerAMP could compress the selectet fields into two versions (e.g. WMA and MP3...) in one single step...

3) can I see the command line given to LAME somewhere? (Would be great for experienced users to understand the option-switches.)

thanx 4 dbpowerAMP. .. .lu

08-03-2003, 07:37 AM
There is no command line for lame, as dMC uses Lame.dll

You can use any encoder you like if you install the 'Generic CLI' encoder.