Jonas Eckerman wrote:

Thank you Jonas, you may have won the prize. :-)

Thanks. What do I get? :-)

How about The Lord H Platter? A set of my favourite RMS normalized
MP3s? Just kidding. They've been "severely dicked with" I tell you! :-)

Actually, I feel I have won something. I've won some knew knowledge about
MP3 encoders.

There ya go!

But I honestly think that I'm not the only person in this group who has
come to that conclusion nor the only person who has posted it to the group.

One day it was stated that ATH-based filtration was fixed in relation to
Full Scale. Another day it was stated that ATH-based filtration was
relative to max-peak level on a frame-by-frame basis. But you, sir,
were the one who first posted the URL which revealed to me that *both*
are true depending upon the age of one's LAME encoder! AFAIK, all
prior arguments - including my own - seemed to rely on the assumption
that either one or the other was true at all times without taking into
consideration the shift in the LAME developers' policy from using a
fixed-position to using relative-positions as progress ensued.

(1) If ATH-based filtration occurs with older LAME encoders from a fixed
position relative to Full Scale, my hypothesis should be true.

(2) If ATH-based filtration occurs with newer LAME encoders from a
relative position in relation to max-peak levels on a frame-by-frame
basis, my hypothesis should be false.

Therefore, the answer to all of this is clearly "yes and no".

Myke

P.S. What I want to know now is what the policy in this regard has been
throughout the history of ATRAC development for MiniDisc - but I'm not
going to start my search for that particular answer in this forum.

--

-================================-
Windows...It's rebootylicious!!!
-================================-