Multiformat 128 kbps Listening Test
Reply #626 – 2005-11-28 15:03:11
For your information, the original criticisms were constructive (I notice you didn't even respond to my "constructive criticisms" in my last post -- how's that for selective reading?). They became unconstructive once someone decided to take them personally [a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=345961"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] Your original criticisms were maybe constructive (I doubt so), but were totally off-topic. The way LAME developers are working on their encoder has nothing to do or to be debate in this thread.It was rude of Gambit to make the comment that he did. But on the other hand, he was making an observation based on actual behavior. Given all that has transpired in this thread and now this, I can't say that what he said was wrong (sorry), even if it wasn't very tactful to make it a public observation. He made an observation?! He treated Sebastian as "clueless person" (before abusing of the moderating tools by removing the insult and cleaning my quote ). Clueless mean "someone who knows nothing about nothing". Is Sebastian a clueless guy? Does he really know nothing? How could you tell that Gambit's words were just an observation?! It's offending. Based on nothing.
Wavpack Hybrid: one encoder, one encoding for all scenarios WavPack -c4.5hx6 (44100Hz & 48000Hz) ≈ 390 kbps + correction file WavPack -c4hx6 (96000Hz) ≈ 768 kbps + correction file WavPack -h (SACD & DSD) ≈ 2400 kbps at 2.8224 MHz