Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Reply to this topicStart new topic
Lowpass function accuracy in LAME?
Shadow RD
post Feb 15 2003, 06:06
Post #1

Group: Members
Posts: 18
Joined: 20-April 02
Member No.: 1825

Hi All,

I was wondering - is the lowpass function used in LAME of a comparable quality to the ones used in Cool Edit Pro? I mean quality in terms of the amount of introduced noise and the reproduction of frequencies.

Is it worthwhile for quality reasons to perform the lowpass function outside of LAME?

Also, can anyone see anything wrong with the following for 192 CBR (I will exclude -k if lowpass inside lame is high quality)?:

-b192 -m j -h -k --nspsytune -Z 1 -X 1,3 --athtype 2 --ns-bass -2

Which switches are unnecessary because they are default?


The Probel with Troublems
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Feb 15 2003, 15:53
Post #2

A/V Moderator

Group: Members
Posts: 317
Joined: 20-August 02
Member No.: 3123

The quality of the lowpass used by Cool Edit Pro is slighty better than the Lame one, but it's almost impossible to hear a difference.
You can hear differences only for a lowpass like 15000-16000 Hz, using a filter like Chebychev 2 (in CEP 2).

And the for commandline, just use alt-preset CBR 192.

This post has been edited by Oge_user: Feb 15 2003, 15:55

[ Commodore 64 Forever...! ]
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Feb 15 2003, 16:44
Post #3

Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 6-February 03
From: Valencia
Member No.: 4874

Don't worry about filtering. LAME has well implemented filters and when usign well designed digital filters is impossible to hear any difference.
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: 19th December 2014 - 03:24