Can anyone out there tell me if RealOnePlayers built in mp3 encoder is
any good? If it isnt can you recommend a good FREE mp3 encoder?

Thank you

"Peach" wrote in message
om...
Can anyone out there tell me if RealOnePlayers built in mp3 encoder is
any good? If it isnt can you recommend a good FREE mp3 encoder?

Thank you

Chun-Yu's MP3 writer plugin for WinAmp is hassle-free and costs nothing.

http://classic.winamp.com/plugins/de...ponentId=33396

"Peach" wrote in message
om

Can anyone out there tell me if RealOnePlayers built in mp3 encoder is
any good?

It's hard to keep up with the revolving door of this week's MP3 coder, but
the pedigree of RealNetwork encoders is not a good one.

If it isnt can you recommend a good FREE mp3 encoder?

Here are some recent recommendations from a person whose opinion I respect
and cites deteailed references. I think every product he mentions can be
obtained for $0.00.

-----------------------

From: ff123
Newsgroups: alt.music.mp3
Subject: Real World Sound Quality - iTunes 128k AAC
Message-ID:


http://audio.ciara.us/test/128extension/results.html

Any of the modern codecs, including Quicktime (iTunes) AAC and WMAPro
9, are significantly better than lame mp3 (and far better than Blade
mp3) at 128 kbit/s. This particular listening test doesn't compare
AAC against mp3 at 192 kbit/s, though.

-----------------------

From: ff123
Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
Subject: good mp3 batch encoder for true stereo separation?
Message-ID:


Upgrade your MMJB to at least 6.1. Version 6.0 has a stereo
separation bug. See:

http://ff123.net/training/training.html#mc_sich_short

for an example of what this bug can sound like.

But for best quality mp3, use the lame mp3 encoder with the
--alt-preset standard setting.

http://doc.hydrogenaudio.org/wikis/h...ecommendedLAME

http://doc.hydrogenaudio.org/wikis/h...o/LameCompiles

---------------------------

From: ff123
Newsgroups: alt.music.mp3
Subject: Blade? Lame? Alright, which one is better?
Message-ID:


Blade is one of the worst-sounding mp3 encoders around, assuming you
encode at 128 kbit/s. If you encode at higher bitrates, I would still
choose lame (use --alt-preset standard).

http://audio.ciara.us/test/128extension/results.html

-----------------------------

From: ff123
Newsgroups: rec.audio.opinion
Subject: Public Listening Test at 64 kbs
Message-ID:


Lame mp3 at 128 kbit/s and FhG mp3 at 64 kbit/s are used as the high
and low anchors, respectively.

1. No codec at 64 kbit/s can claim to be as good as mp3 at 128
kbit/s.
2. High efficiency AAC (AAC with spectral band replication, similar
to mp3 with SBR, aka mp3pro) makes a good first showing, being the
first among equals (he-aac, mp3pro, and ogg vorbis).
3. WMA9, Real, and Quicktime AAC make poor showings. While better
than the hoary mp3 at 64 kbit/s, they are definitely worse than the
top three 64 kbit/s contenders.

The test introduces schnofler's java version of abc/hr, the blind
listening utility:

http://rarewares.hydrogenaudio.org/files/abchr-java.zip