Rockbox.org home
release
dev builds
extras
themes manual
wiki
device status forums
mailing lists
IRC bugs
patches
dev guide



Rockbox mail archive

Subject: Re: EAC/Lame THE ANSWER !!!

Re: EAC/Lame THE ANSWER !!!

From: Planet77 <planet77_at_gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 22:22:56 +0100

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Bright" <mark.bright_at_btopenworld.com>
To: <rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 8:53 PM
Subject: RE: EAC/Lame THE ANSWER !!!


> OK, since it has been the subject of MUCH debate over the last few days, I
> thought I would give EAC/LAME another go.
>
> Last time I used it, it did work EXCEPTIONALLY well, but was really
> difficult to configure etc. I tried the new version yesterday; ripping one
> track that I know quite well, from a CD that I rate highly for quality
> reproduction, with both Musicmatch and EAC/LAME giving 160kbps VBR files.

CUT...

> ROUND THREE:
> As musicmatch completed the task in about 6 minutes, and EAC/LAME took 37
> minutes...
>
> CLEAR WINNER; MusicMatch.....

CUT...

> Mark


Hi!
I ripped a musicfile from an audio cd, about 4 minutes in the highest quality
plus VBR2 (high quality, too) The file had a bitrate around 200 kbit/s.
It took about 3 minutes. I don't how it could be more than 30 minutes? I have a
Athlon XP 2000. Nothing special.
Perhaps you really have something wrong configured.
If you want I can tell what options I choose exactly.

Fred
Received on 2003-12-22

Page template was last modified "Sat Sep 18 20:21:06 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy