Lame Style Winamp Plugin

2001-12-21 12:45:37

Is there a winamp plugin that will give the same results as
LAME.EXE --decode
There is a lot of in_mp3.dll type mp3 decoders out there e.g. MAD, Winamp 2.22, in_mpg123, but none of them give the same results as Lame. We use these plugins to play the mp3 but we choose Lame.exe to decode it, is there a quality issue?

Very Puzzled
:confused:

Please don't flame the duck

Lame Style Winamp Plugin

Reply #1 – 2001-12-21 15:18:15

Theoretically, the mpg123 plugin should give almost identical results because both that and lame use the mpglib for decoding, if I am not mistaken.

john33

Lame Style Winamp Plugin

Reply #2 – 2001-12-21 15:36:32

LAME uses the mpg123 decoder, so the results shouldn't be very different from the Shibatch mpg123 plugin. Maybe the only difference is the offset correction that LAME uses with --decode?

All the plugins you mention are very accurate, so there are no quality issues.

See: http://mp3decoders.org/, but you probably know of that site already.

Lame Style Winamp Plugin

Reply #3 – 2001-12-22 02:59:35

I've just done a few tests to compare the out put of a few Winamp plugins (e.g in_Mp3.dll) in conparsion to the output of LAME --decode.

I used the song  Glokenpop by Spiderbait as the test track

I encoded it as LAME  -b 256 -m j -q 0 and used EAC to compare them.

Lame Decoded Compared to Mad Decoded (no Auto clipping  attenuation).
Different samples 0:00:00.000 - 0:03:19.863 and the mad decoded is 0:00:00.051 longer.

Lame Decoded compared to winamp Fraunhofer (2.22) plugin.
different samples 0:00:00.027 - 0:03:18.783, the lame decoded wav was missing 834 samples at 0:03:18.783 and 450 samples at 0:03:18.791, the Fraunhofer decoded wav was 0:00:00.051 longer.

Lame decoded compared to Mpg123.dll.
different samples 0:00:00.027 - 0:03:18.783, the lame decoded wav was missing 834 samples at 0:03:18.783 and 450 samples at 0:03:18.791, the Mpg123.dll decoded wav was 0:00:00.051 longer.

Lame Decode compared to Winamp 2.78 in_mp3.dll (2.76b69)
different samples 0:00:00.027 - 0:03:18.783, the lame decoded wav was missing 834 samples at 0:03:18.783 and 450 samples at 0:03:18.791, the in_mp3.dll decoded wav was 0:00:00.051 longer.

Puzzling ?, YES!

Lame Style Winamp Plugin

Reply #4 – 2001-12-26 09:46:45

Hi all,

A couple of questions about mpg123:

1. mp3decoders.org states that since winamp 2.7 is now 'redundant' with mpg123. Is that true? Is mpg123 still better than in_mp3 ver. 2.76b69 (Winamp 2.78

2. If mpg123 is indeed better. Where can I find the latest Winamp plugin? Can't find it on winamp.com. All the sites I find (mp3decoders, mpg123.de) link to http://www.geocities.co.jp/Technopolis/9674/in_mpg123.html which is a broken link!! 

Thanks for your help.
Jord

Lame Style Winamp Plugin

Reply #5 – 2001-12-26 10:20:40

Jord

If you use this link: http://home.pi.be/~mk442837/in_mpg123_118.zip , you should get the current version (from Mitiok's site).

john33

Lame Style Winamp Plugin

Reply #6 – 2002-01-03 22:50:12

Back from vacation!!!

I got it! Thanks a lot!

Jord