IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
LAME 3.96 Builds Differ In Size, Mitiok's build bigger than Rarewares
Teqnilogik
post Apr 15 2004, 00:08
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 352
Joined: 25-January 04
From: USA
Member No.: 11500



I downloaded Mitiok's build of LAME 3.96 when it was released and the file size of the EXE is 197KB. I just downloaded the Rarewares compile and it is 186KB. Should I be concerned that there is a problem with one of these builds due to the file size difference?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kalmark
post Apr 15 2004, 00:16
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 599
Joined: 9-October 03
From: ZZ 9 Plural Z Alpha
Member No.: 9230



Generally, there is no cause to be concerned. I think Mitiok and John33 used a different compiler or different compiler setting, hence the difference.

There might be a problem with any of the files, but this is not simply due to the exe sizes.

I think (though I might be wrong) that these two lame.exes should give bit-identical mp3's (or at least the decompressed wav's should be bit-identical).

Maybe someone with more knowledge will come to our aid smile.gif

This post has been edited by kalmark: Apr 15 2004, 00:17


--------------------
Life is Real...
(But not in audio :) )
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
smz
post Apr 15 2004, 00:23
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 601
Joined: 15-February 04
From: Venezia, Italia
Member No.: 12025



... I don't think so... just two different compiles. The one at Rarewares is made by John33 using ICL4.5, the one at Mitiok is made (I presume) by Dimitry Kutsanov using MSC. There is another floating around compiled by Gabriel Bouvigne and probably many others home brewed versions.

I think you can pick the one you love the best. They could also generate slightly different files due to different math libraries.

At one point I used to think that Mitiok compiles could be considered as the "unoficial reference" ones, but I'm not sure about that anymore. Maybe a lame developer could shed some light on that...

Sergio

Edit: oops.. I'm a slow typer... kalmark got first! rolleyes.gif

This post has been edited by smz: Apr 15 2004, 00:25


--------------------
Sergio
Revox B150 + (JBL 4301B | Sennheiser HD430)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jkml
post Apr 15 2004, 02:51
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 72
Joined: 11-November 01
From: Hong Kong
Member No.: 437



Does anyone know why John33 compiled lame.exe and lame_enc.dll with ICL 4.5 but lameACM.acm with ICL 7.1?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Apr 15 2004, 09:32
Post #5


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3761
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



QUOTE (jkml @ Apr 15 2004, 01:51 AM)
Does anyone know why John33 compiled lame.exe and lame_enc.dll with ICL 4.5 but lameACM.acm with ICL 7.1?

Because the ICL4.5 compiler does not produce a viable ACM compile. This is nothing to worry about as the 4.5 and 7.1 compiled encoders produce bit identical results, it's just that the 4.5 compiler generates slightly faster code.


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
profichiller
post Apr 15 2004, 11:22
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 11
Joined: 28-January 04
Member No.: 11583



QUOTE (john33 @ Apr 15 2004, 12:32 AM)
Because the ICL4.5 compiler does not produce a viable ACM compile. This is nothing to worry about as the 4.5 and 7.1 compiled encoders produce bit identical results, it's just that the 4.5 compiler generates slightly faster code.

I suppose you meant to say it generates the code slightly faster.

Else, how could one of two bit identical codes be faster?
greets Tz
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tigre
post Apr 15 2004, 11:46
Post #7


Moderator


Group: Members
Posts: 1434
Joined: 26-November 02
Member No.: 3890



QUOTE (profichiller @ Apr 15 2004, 12:22 PM)
QUOTE (john33 @ Apr 15 2004, 12:32 AM)
Because the ICL4.5 compiler does not produce a viable ACM compile. This is nothing to worry about as the 4.5 and 7.1 compiled encoders produce bit identical results, it's just that the 4.5 compiler generates slightly faster code.

I suppose you meant to say it generates the code slightly faster.

Else, how could one of two bit identical codes be faster?
greets Tz

"the code is faster" = "the program build with compiler X needs less time for the same job then the same program build with compiler Y". The result is identical, i.e the mp3s encoded with both encoders are (should be) bit-identical.


--------------------
Let's suppose that rain washes out a picnic. Who is feeling negative? The rain? Or YOU? What's causing the negative feeling? The rain or your reaction? - Anthony De Mello
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Apr 15 2004, 12:04
Post #8


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3761
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



I should probably have said "generates slightly faster executables". wink.gif


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
BadHorsie
post Apr 15 2004, 14:19
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 84
Joined: 1-December 02
Member No.: 3951



I have compiled 3.96 on Mac OS X yesterday. A "make test" shows me 7694 diffs from the testfile. Is this not a little bit to much? On Linux i got 400 diffs. But 7694 on Mac OS X....

BadHorsie
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
eagleray
post Apr 15 2004, 19:25
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 265
Joined: 15-December 03
Member No.: 10452



Having done some limited encoding with both builds using --preset standard, I found the output to be bit for bit identical, but John33's build to be about 9% faster on a P4.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rutra80
post Apr 15 2004, 20:36
Post #11





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 810
Joined: 12-September 03
Member No.: 8821



Here, on AthlonXP, LAME from Mitiok's web-site is a bit faster, output is bit-identical.

EDIT: Oops, it's not bit-identical, but the differences seem to be in mp3 header only...

This post has been edited by rutra80: Apr 15 2004, 20:49
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd November 2014 - 15:31