[X4U] Most advanced Video Codec WMV?

[Stroller]

On 19 Jan 2007, at 19:58, B. Kuestner wrote:
> ...
> By the way, you also have that for MP3: You can tell iTunes to  
> encode MP3 and invest more or less effort in the task. So setting  
> it to 128 kb/s VBR will give you different results if you tell  
> iTunes to be quick about it or analyze the audio material much  
> longer to get the best result. But even then the LAME encoder still  
> does better at the same bitrate than iTunes' built-in encoder as  
> far as MP3 is concerned, even if you put iTunes to the highest  
> encoding effort/quality.

Hi there,

I'm not doubting you, but curious. What are your grounds for this  
statement? Have you done a blind listening-test of LAME v iTunes  
encoding yourself, or is this widely documented on the web? Or is it  
simply that posters to the LAME mailing list regularly make the same  
assertion?

Whilst I was aware that in theory different encoders could produce  
different qualities of audio I guess I'd somewhat expect it to apply  
more to image or movie compression. Now you have me all paranoid that  
I shouldn't be ripping my songs in iTunes, even though I'm unlikely  
to be able to hear the difference myself!

Stroller.