 |
| | Fraunhofer Radium MP3 codec 1.263 Profesional : Reviews |
Rating: 4.6 | | |
 Fraunhofer Radium MP3 codec 1.263 Profesional
Date: 5 Apr 2008 | Rating: 5 | Written by: Harald |
5. |
Sehr schön ;-) Besten Dank!
|
Fraunhofer Radium MP3 codec 1.263 Profesional
Date: 24 Apr 2007 | Rating: 5 | Written by: XXX |
4. |
Fraunhofer Radium MP3 codec 1.263 Profesional
Date: 2 Mar 2007 | Rating: 3 | Written by: Chris |
3. |
The bottom reviewer doesn't realise that mp3 is a lossy format, and thus it would be nothing short of a miracle if this codec produced a lossless format mp3.
How far can you go to use Fraunhofer instead of LAME?
Well, LAME provides by far the best quality encodes. It wins hands down. The only time you really need to use this codec is if and when you have an application which only supports this codec.
This is not BROADCAST quality at all; it is PROFESSIONAL quality. It is COMMERCIAL: meaning that commercial applications pay for the licensing to use IIS without revealing they're actually using IIS.
In addition, this is the cracked version of the codec: the original Fraunhofer codec doesn't encode above a very low bitrate.
|
Fraunhofer Radium MP3 codec 1.263 Profesional
Date: 31 Jul 2006 | Rating: 5 | Written by: SLA |
2. |
Fraunhofer IIS MP3 Codec is surely much better than LAME. Fraunhofer's encoding speed is slow, but quality is very good. You can feel the difference, if you are using professional High-End sound players.
|
Fraunhofer Radium MP3 codec 1.263 Profesional
Date: 20 Dec 2005 | Rating: 5 | Written by: mark |
1. |
Often misunderstood, Fraunhofer MP3 codec is a BROADCAST quality codec and designed to produce high quality lossless conversion, if you have the correct install, a 96kbps stereo encode with Fraunhofer codec will out strip a LAME encode any day, how I know is I have tried and studied sound engineering and my area of intrest is psyco-accoustics within audio compression codecs.
LAME is always shown in a good light, its an OK general purpose encoder but TBH, I where possible avoide LAME encoders and the encoded audio is not always that good, especially at producing an 'artifact free' encode. LAME at the top end tends to make high frequencys sound 'Wishy washy' and lacks proper definition.
You have to weight up what you want and make your choice, what I would like is people to stop this stupid assumption that LAME is the best encoder around, the saying is true, you only get what you pay for anf if your looking at quality, Fraunhofer wins hands down, they after all are wahts used within the media and broadcasting industrys, so that alone should spaek volumes, if LAME was best, youd agree that the industry would have picked up on it in a big way, bat as it is not, they havent...
Decide for yourself but be sure your aware of the facts before you decide.
|
|
|
|
|
