Tweet
Is there any easy way to find out if files with lame 3.98.3 are corrupt?
The latest update to dBpoweramp also updates the Lame encoder to 3.98.4 because it sometimes created corrupt mp3 files at "certain" bit rates. Is there any way I can go through my music files and pick out all the corrupt ones--because I haven't listened to all of them--or, if not, then to pick out all those that were created with the 3.98.3 version? I always encode at the highest quality bitrate--VBR, extreme, and slow--and, yes, I know it doesn't make sense to to use that setting, but would mp3s made using that setting be corrupt? Is that one of the "certain" bit rates that were affected?
-
-
Re: Is there any easy way to find out if files with lame 3.98.3 are corrupt?
I would re-encode them all, there is no way to know how different programs would be effected. -
Re: Is there any easy way to find out if files with lame 3.98.3 are corrupt?
Do you know for which bitrates lame 3.98.3 created corrupted files? Was this for CBR? VBR? independent?Comment
-
Re: Is there any easy way to find out if files with lame 3.98.3 are corrupt?
Another question:
I have just converted a large number of mp3's (with 3.98.3) encoded at CBR320, with the only purpose of removing leading/trailing silence via DSP. Output file is again CBR320.
In such cases -when there it no effective change at the bitrate, but only the DSP runs- how does dbpoweramp behaves/works? Does it try to convert from CBR320 to ..CBR320, or it just recognizes that no change is needed and just copies the mp3 frames without passing anything to the codec???Comment
-
Re: Is there any easy way to find out if files with lame 3.98.3 are corrupt?
I believe it still re-encodes the files, resulting in a slight loss of quality.Comment
-
Re: Is there any easy way to find out if files with lame 3.98.3 are corrupt?
I have a 100 or more gb of mp3s and I have no idea how long I have been using 3.98.3. Is there a program that could search all my mp3s and pull out a list of those that were encoded with Lame 3.98.3?Comment
-
Re: Is there any easy way to find out if files with lame 3.98.3 are corrupt?
I am sorry I do not know which bitrates were effected. Lames advertised version number will only show 3.98 not the .xComment
-
Re: Is there any easy way to find out if files with lame 3.98.3 are corrupt?
This is a good time to remind folks that my be reading this forum, that this is a reason for ripping to lossless (FLAC), even if you plan to mostly use lossy on a portable, etc. And you should keep your tags/art exactly as you want it on these lossless files.
If something like this 3.98.3 issue comes up, one simply deletes your lossy archive, points at your LOSSLESS archives with dbpoweramp, and a day or so later you have a fresh lossy archive with the latest and greatest lossy codec (with all tags/art perfect).Comment
-
Re: Is there any easy way to find out if files with lame 3.98.3 are corrupt?
My lame shows up as 3.98r instead of 3.98.2 or 3.98.3, and when I went looking, I only found two forums, hydrogenaudio and one other, via Google, that discussed the issue of trying to find out which version of 3.98 a file was encoded by. It appears that any release other than the original, which will show up as plain 3.98, would show up as 3.98r. I tried a suggestion in one of the forums to open the mp3 with notepad, and use Find to look for Lame, but that still gives only a 3.98r, so there is no way I can separate out all the ones that were encoded by 3.98.3.
This lack of information is built into the encoder itself, and there is no 3rd party program that can get the actual version out of an mp3, is that correct?
If Lame 3.98.3 was released on 2/27/10, all I should have to do is redo anything between that date and a couple of weeks ago. Regarding the FLAC suggestion, I already take that: I am ultraparanoid, and I keep cds in one place, their FLACs in another, and the mp3s for regular use in various other places, so I will just reconvert all the FLACs from about March onward.Comment
Comment