View Full Version : LAME 3.95 Stable Released

01-11-2004, 12:44 PM
Available now at Rarewares. Highlights are:

LAME 3.95 January 11 2004
Gabriel Bouvigne:

fixed lowpass values when using vbr with mono files

faster quantization loops

faster count_bits

fixed a buffer requirement error in ACM codec

Takehiro TOMINAGA:

fixed mpglib and other decoding support code to prevent the crash when invalid mp3 input

removed Layer I decoding support
use FastLog and IEEE 754 hack on PowerPC too (approx. 10 percent faster)


02-08-2004, 02:53 PM
Would it be a difficult upgrade to implement Lame 3.95.1 with an upcoming release of dBpowerAMP?

02-09-2004, 05:02 AM
It would need another release of dMC, which I cannot do because on my machines it is all a beta version, so it would require a fresh PC and all the installs, not an easy job.

03-03-2004, 08:15 PM
Hi Guys!

FYI: I've been using the new Lame 3.95 dll in Audiograbber 1.83
for a few weeks now, trying to convert my CD collection to Mp3's
(Settings: VBR0/VBR1, Full Stereo, Highest Quality)

After a lot of "Unexpected Codec Errors" I kind of grew frustrated
with it and tried using DMC instead for the those few tricky tracks.

And to my amazement I discovered, that the tracks ripped and encoded
in Audiograbber using the Lame 3.95 dll, sounds - if not crappy - then at
least flat, tired and lacking a lot of the original "Oomph" that the original
CD has. (And the tracks causing the aforementioned errors, sounded even
worse, as if coming from an old radio, and heard through the neighbours wall.)

The tracks ripped with DMC and the apparently older version of Lame
(Which version are you currently using?) sounded WAY BETTER!!
Full of power, bass and just.. erh... "The Right Oomph", you know!?
(Settings: VBR, "Very High", Minimum 160, Maximum 320)

So my conclusion is this: Lame 3.95 sounds worse than the older versions
for some reason. I am in no way an expert in audio, but even to my untrained
ear, something important is clearly missing from the end result.

In short: You might want to think twice about implementing this version
in your next release. At least use your expertise and test the sound of the
encoded files thoroughly. In the meanwhile I'm going back to my old version.

Just thought I'd let you know.
If you need more info please reply to: dbpoweramp@maansson.tv

Best Regards
Morten Maansson
Exec. Producer
TV2 Zulu

03-07-2004, 01:28 AM

I've fiddled around with the settings and tested
various combinations on several different CD's...

Turns out that the "Dual Stereo" setting is the culprit.
The moment you use this setting the sound quality changes
drastically and gets too much treble, too little bass, and
worst of all, lousy stereo separation. All voice and singing
mysteriously shifts to the left channel. Very annoying.

After recoding my CD's with the regular "Stereo" setting
(the third of the four setting possibilities), my mp3's sounds as
close to the real CD's as they can. Only with some loss in volume.

Just thought you'd might like to know.
Best Regards

03-07-2004, 03:18 AM
just use -alt preset Standard.

03-08-2004, 02:22 PM
How do you fiddle with the "dual stereo" settings in Lame? I listen to older audio from the 40's and 50's which seem to lose A LOT of a bass when I rip, I may have the same problem you had with the "dual stereo" thing, how do I check to find out?

03-08-2004, 02:23 PM
P.S. = I'm using LAME 3.95 with the newest DMC and registered powerpack.

03-08-2004, 05:45 PM
Oh, forget it, I figured it out, thanks!

03-16-2004, 07:50 AM
I don't know, but as good as LAME 3.95 VBR sounds, I find that WMA 9 sounds as good or better at equivalent file sizes. This sucks, because I hate Microshit. Considering how unstable Windows is, this latest WMA is just short of miraculous. It also seems to know when it can cut corners and still deliver the goods. It is the codec that is most responsive to the music it is encoding. Tracks from the 40's (even at VBR 98) will be super tiny compared with the equivalent setting on any other codec.

03-21-2004, 11:52 AM
Hi I'm still using LAME 3.93.1, and probably will continue to do so until the newer versions have been tested and refined. I believe there is now a 3.96 version available. Somehow it does not surprise me that 3.95 does not hold up well.

08-04-2004, 05:04 AM