Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: EAC/Lame
From: SteamShip <steamship_at_sbcglobal.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 01:40:46 -0500
Actually, I was saying to use this for those who think EAC/Lame is hard to
setup or use, and this config will be way better than what they had been
using (except for CDex). I myself did upgrade to that later version and
same settings that you mentioned, but I know the program.
Myden's site is great for someone starting out with EAC like the person
asking in this thread who didn't get beyond the .wav files being extracted.
LOL....I'm now seeing the benefit of TinyURL when I look at your post
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Maxwell" <rockbox_at_anti-spam.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 20, 2003 12:25 AM
Subject: RE: EAC/Lame
> SteamShip wrote:
> > With time, and more development these two programs may end up being
> > closer, but I see no point in anyone going out of their way to unseat
> > since it has so much support, works so well, and has huge networks of
> > file trading,
> I agree with you completely up to here.
> > but ONLY with those who have used EAC with this config to rip them.
> Here we will have to disagree. While Chris Myden has a good
> it's not ideal for someone desiring optimum quality. Chris Myden's
> configuration uses an older version of LAME (3.90.2) and uses the
> "--alt-preset standard" setting. I prefer to use LAME 3.93.1 (current)
> the "-preset extreme" setting. That setting makes somewhat larger, but
> better quality, MP3 files. Also, between 3.90.2 and 3.93.1, LAME has had
> numerous improvements which improve sound quality. Look at the history
> between the two versions:
> Fred Maxwell
Received on 2003-12-20