Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: EAC, LAME and the drop-down bug (Read 3253 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

EAC, LAME and the drop-down bug

Hello.
As most people around here I have been using EAC/LAME for my MP3 encodes.
I have started using EAC 0.9 Beta 2 (the newest one) and LAME 3.97a10 (I know it is not recommended, but I am not archiving and it is hel of a lot faster that the "recommended compile").

As some of you should know, there was a bug a while back on the EAC encoder settings that it you selected "LAME MP3 Encoder", the drop-down quality menu would affect the VBR Tag (IIRC), altough not the file itself, which would be the same file produced using the "User Defined Encoder" setting.

I made some encodes this past weekend, using the "LAME MP3" setting, command line "-V 4 --vbr-new" and the drop-down menu set to 160k.

The files came almost CBR 160. They have very little variation on that rate. Almost as if it where ABR.

I encoded those same files using foobar2000, and they came up as expected (maybe a little higher, averaging 180 per file).

Is the EAC "bug" made worse on this version?

I have not been able to do a bit comparison between the tracks after decoding them to wav to look for actual differences, because I don't have access to those files now.
But I will try to do it tonight.

Does anyone know anything about this?
I'm the one in the picture, sitting on a giant cabbage in Mexico, circa 1978.
Reseñas de Rock en Español: www.estadogeneral.com

EAC, LAME and the drop-down bug

Reply #1 –
Don't know. Why not simply set up a decent command line + cl encoder and thus getting rid of any nasty bug?
 

EAC, LAME and the drop-down bug

Reply #2 –
Quote
Hello.
As most people around here I have been using EAC/LAME for my MP3 encodes.
I have started using EAC 0.9 Beta 2 (the newest one) and LAME 3.97a10 (I know it is not recommended, but I am not archiving and it is hel of a lot faster that the "recommended compile").

As some of you should know, there was a bug a while back on the EAC encoder settings that it you selected "LAME MP3 Encoder", the drop-down quality menu would affect the VBR Tag (IIRC), altough not the file itself, which would be the same file produced using the "User Defined Encoder" setting.

I made some encodes this past weekend, using the "LAME MP3" setting, command line "-V 4 --vbr-new" and the drop-down menu set to 160k.

The files came almost CBR 160. They have very little variation on that rate. Almost as if it where ABR.

I encoded those same files using foobar2000, and they came up as expected (maybe a little higher, averaging 180 per file).

Is the EAC "bug" made worse on this version?

I have not been able to do a bit comparison between the tracks after decoding them to wav to look for actual differences, because I don't have access to those files now.
But I will try to do it tonight.

Does anyone know anything about this?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=308588"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I've ran into this problem before with older EACs (though I haven't tried it with the newer one)... It seems that when you use the LAME Encoder in the pulldown and select a bitrate, it adds "-b [bitrate]" to the command line... The best thing to do would be to just select "User Defined Encoder".