From: Michael O'Quinn <michael_at_oquinn.info>
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 08:07:41 -0700 (PDT)

On Sat, 25 Oct 2003, Chris Holt wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Oct 2003 22:15:10 -0700 (PDT), Michael O'Quinn wrote:
> > I would be interested to hear about other people's experiences with JS
> > using a current version of LAME. I have not noticed any audible
> > artifacts being introduced, although I haven't really been all that
> > through in my checking.
> >
> > Michael
>
> My experience has been similar to yours. After trying several other
> codecs a while back I settled on LAME and all the encoding software I use,
> uses LAME. I've always used either JS or mono, and I've also discovered
> the excellent quality/size abilities of VBR.
>
> I can think of a few cases where VBR can be (and has been) problematic,
> but haven't encountered any where JS was.
>
> Chris

Glad to see I'm not the only one who has found JS on LAME working well.

What kinds of problems have you had with VBR, and with what source
material? And how did you fix it?

Michael
Received on 2003-10-25