|
Subject:Why not LAME mp3?
Posted by: hat3k
Date:10/6/2005 8:20:54 AM
SONY why can't you include LAME encoding? 0.97 is out now |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: rraud
Date:10/6/2005 5:35:25 PM
Because:..... "LAME AIN"T AN MP3 ENCODER". Legal issues and such. |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: hat3k
Date:10/6/2005 10:01:50 PM
And what? Please explain, is it bad? Many progs use it, free and shareware, big and small ones. Can we have an ability to at least manually use lame_enc.dll with SONY products? |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: Jamil
Date:10/7/2005 4:23:16 PM
LAME is illegal in commercial software. I'm sure a lot of people drive faster than posted speed limits too... |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: hat3k
Date:10/26/2005 7:24:56 AM
Now i found myself that LAME is bad encoder imho against Fraunhofer |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: Vocalpoint
Date:10/26/2005 6:29:20 PM
"LAME is illegal in commercial software. I'm sure a lot of people drive faster than posted speed limits too..." What the hell R ya talking about? The LAME encoder comes pre-installed and ready to go as my main (and very very good) MP3 encoder with Wavelab 4.0. Get informed before ya start spreadin' rumors. |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: Vocalpoint
Date:10/26/2005 6:30:22 PM
"Now i found myself that LAME is bad encoder imho against Fraunhofer " Do tell how you decided this? |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: Jamil
Date:10/26/2005 6:52:02 PM
"What the hell R ya talking about? The LAME encoder comes pre-installed and ready to go as my main (and very very good) MP3 encoder with Wavelab 4.0. Get informed before ya start spreadin' rumors. " The laws vary based on location. It's illegal without a patent license in the states. Actually, Steinberg is not even a licensee of MP3 technologies. I see that Ahead is. Both companies are located in Germany, so perhaps Steinberg is simply breaking the law? Licensees listed here: http://www.mp3licensing.com/licensees/index.asp Licensed PC software listed here: http://www.mp3licensing.com/licensees/software.asp Message last edited on10/26/2005 7:21:31 PM byJamil. |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: cabonium
Date:10/27/2005 4:00:52 AM
"*Steinberg is simply breaking the law?*" 5) Do I need a license to distribute mp3, mp3PRO or mp3surround encoded content? .... "However, no license is needed for private, non-commercial activities (e.g., home-entertainment, receiving broadcasts and creating a personal music library), not generating revenue or other consideration of any kind or for entities with associated annual gross revenue less than US$ 100 000.00" I think LAME or using mp3 is not illegal if you following rule 5) Perhaps Steinberg didnt come close to US$ 100 000.00 with the WaveLap product. |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: Vocalpoint
Date:10/27/2005 11:12:55 AM
Jamil, "Actually, Steinberg is not even a licensee of MP3 technologies. I see that Ahead is. Both companies are located in Germany, so perhaps Steinberg is simply breaking the law? Licensees listed here: http://www.mp3licensing.com/licensees/index.asp" How in any way does this info apply to the LAME encoding engine? This site and everything on it belongs/relates to Thomson-Fraunhofer. Can't imagine why Steinberg and others who use the LAME decoder would be listed under "licensed" companies on the Thomson/Fraunhofer site. Check out the LAME site - Steinberg is listed and has a proper "license" to include the decoder in Wavelab. |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: Jamil
Date:10/27/2005 3:33:16 PM
"How in any way does this info apply to the LAME encoding engine? This site and everything on it belongs/relates to Thomson-Fraunhofer. " ... "Check out the LAME site - Steinberg is listed and has a proper "license" to include the decoder in Wavelab." I'm by no means a lawyer. The LAME site did have a link to a licensing FAQ page though. The author of it stated he was not a legal expert either. There were two interesting items: 15. If I don't use their source, can I make my own MP3 decoder without paying FhG? Legally, FhG may or may not have rights regarding patented technology that is necessary to make an MP3 decoder. If they do, it is within their right to enforce it and prevent you from making any MP3 decoder, whether or not you had help from them to do it. 16. If I don't use their source, can I make my own MP3 encoder without paying FhG? If you infringe on their techniques, it is within their rights to seek recourse, whether or not you had help from them, or whether or not you intentionally or knowingly infriged. EDIT: Hey doesn't Wavelab include the Fraunhofer in addition to LAME? If they're including the Fraunhofer encoder, they're probably already paying the royalties. I'd hope so, anyway. (Well, actually, I don't own any of their software, and I really don't care either way). Message last edited on10/27/2005 4:21:56 PM byJamil. |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: mpd
Date:10/27/2005 5:23:42 PM
The would be listed on the site because Thomson handles all of the licensing for MPEG-1 and MPEG-2 audio (at least layers I, II, and III; not sure about AAC). FhG holds most of the patents covered by these specs, but not all of them. License revenues get divided between all of the patent holders. |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: mpd
Date:10/27/2005 5:32:27 PM
Personally, I make the decision by listening. I think the FhG encoder generates better results at lower bitrates, especially in the 16kbps-32kbps range. I haven't done enough comparisons at higher rates to made a decision, but LAME puts a lot of effort into this range. If you poke around on the net, you may find the set of files that the MPEG group put together for testing encoders. One is a recording of castanets, which many encoders have trouble (or had trouble) with. |
|
Subject:RE: Why not LAME mp3?
Reply by: rraud
Date:10/27/2005 7:44:19 PM
Yes Indeed, I agree, the FhG encoder generates better results at lower bitrates. However I deal a lot with client requested hi-res mono .mp3s for spoken-word programs, and LAME can't be beat for that. With batch converting & code access to set hi & low pass filters, as well as many other parameters to tweak and preset. Now if this could be integrated into SF, life would be great. (or a little bit easier) But as we know; "Lame - Ain't - an - MP3 Encoder. |