Talk:LAME

From Hydrogenaudio Knowledgebase
Jump to: navigation, search

This is the talk page for discussing changes to the LAME article.

  • Please do not use it as a forum for general discussion about the article's subject. Use the forums instead.
  • Please read the wiki policy before editing.
  • Sign and date your posts using two dashes and four tildes (--~~~~).
  • Place new comments after existing ones (but within topic sections).
  • Separate topic sections with a ==Descriptive header==.
  • Feel free to use these smilies by embedding their codes:
    Smiley--).png {{smiley|)}} Smiley--D.png {{smiley|D}} Smiley--(.png {{smiley|(}} Smiley--;.png {{smiley|;}}

Forum discussions (old)[edit]

This article began as a "List of recommended settings" post in the HA forum. Rather than updating the posts there, the information is now only updated here in the wiki. To reduce confusion, recommendations applicable to old versions of LAME are not kept in the wiki.

Here are links to some of the old recommendations and other posts of historical interest:

Page discussion[edit]

I propose a major merging with this page. I don't think information about lame should be scattered all over the wiki. I'll think about it this evening and after the merge I'll add a redirect from all Lame related pages to this one.--Beto 15:51, 13 September 2006 (CDT)

Finally I ended the revision :)--Beto 19:14, 14 September 2006 (CDT)

LAME compiles Win32[edit]

http://rarewares.org/dancer/dancer.php?f=1 is linked at this Wiki page. But at http://rarewares.org/mp3.html I can only find http://rarewares.org/dancer/dancer.php?f=107 The two archives contain different lame.exe and lame_enc.dll. Why is that? Here's another compile: http://mitiok.maresweb.org/ This is confusing! --Pohli 13:16, 27 September 2006 (CDT)

IMO we should not give direct link to the downloader; everytime a new build is outed, the direct link becomes outdated. Better to link only to Rareware's MP3 page. --pepoluan (talk | contribs) 13:46, 27 September 2006 (CDT)
Agree. If noone oposes we should make the change.--Beto (talk | contribs) 15:48, 27 September 2006 (CDT)
PLUS, LAME binaries are illegal in many countries. It's easy to use google. ElliottmobileFishysig.PNG 02:10, 28 September 2006 (CDT)

This issue was resolved in October 2006. Since then, the wiki only recommends and links to the builds at Rarewares. —Mjb (talk) 00:21, 11 September 2014 (BST)

LAME 4.0a14[edit]

There are versions of LAME numbered beyond 3.100 that have been published: most notably, 4.0a6 and 4.0a14. 4.0a14 apparently was released on June 28, 2005, so it is actually quite old - NOT a newer version than 3.100. It might be worth noting this on the LAME page so that no one gets confused. 98.240.142.9 05:25, 8 October 2014 (BST)

Thanks for pointing this out. I looked into it by digging through old forum posts and looking at the code in CVS.
The "4.0 alpha" builds that surfaced in 2003-2005 are based on one developer's experimental code branch that started in 2002. He was very unhappy that builds of this code were being distributed online by random people who thought it was official LAME 4.0 code.
If you were to build a working copy of LAME with code from his branch, as some people apparently did, the binary will indeed say it is LAME 4.0 alpha (4.0a1 through 4.0a14, depending on what snapshot you use). However, this doesn't mean it is the official LAME 4.0 code. It's just a semi-private, alternate version of 3.92, and is one of many such branches in the CVS repository. Official releases are only snapshots of the trunk (the "MAIN" branch).
The "4.0" name was chosen just to keep it from being confused with the trunk's official 3.93 alphas, and to reflect the fact that the branch is a testing ground for ideas of optimizations and architectural changes that may go into LAME 4.0 whenever they decide to start work on it in the trunk.
I attempted to add this info to the History section of the article. Hopefully it's phrased well enough. —Mjb (talk) 15:04, 12 October 2014 (BST)