Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: BladeEnc officially discontinued (Read 11099 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #25 –
Spoon,

Please, please, please, please, please remove Bladeenc! It's completely redundant now and pushing use of it is a /bad thing/. Really.

Lame can do ISO streams so that's not a problem. If there is any problem with portable players and such is has to be a shortcoming of the device. If any problem is found, I'm sure if you let the developers know they will sort it out.

Yes - Blade was interesting at the time but now ... it makes me sigh deeply to think people are still supporting it.

Ruairi
rc55.com - nothing going on

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #26 –
Quote
Originally posted by Ove
Or plugger...


Yes, that was it's name!

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #27 –
I don't push it - it requires a certain amount of effort to install and is there for those who lame does not work, yes they could buy a new computer that works, but many people do not take audio anywhere that seriously.

Ok take this situation - guy installs Lame (default encoder) and it blue screens his computer (in about 1:150,000 people I would say this happens), he goes off looks and installs Blade - it defaults to 192KBps - he rips his mp3s - they sound very reasonable, he is happy...

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #28 –
Can somebody outline this 'tonal purity' bullshit for me?

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #29 –
Quote
Originally posted by spoon
he goes off looks and installs Blade - it defaults to 192KBps - he rips his mp3s - they sound very reasonable
Since when??
Juha Laaksonheimo

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #30 –
Quote
Originally posted by spoon
Ok take this situation - guy installs Lame (default encoder) and it blue screens his computer (in about 1:150,000 people I would say this happens)


This would only happen because of hardware failure (eg too much overclocking, cheap Motherboard and/or RAM, etc). If a stable /  beta LAME fails then I would say for sure that Blade would kick the bucket too...

Besides, what if people still read old codec analysis where Blade was praised for keeping the whole freq spectrum + the 'tonal purity' - and there are lots of these on the net... they'd choose Blade over LAME.

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #31 –
Quote
Originally posted by spoon
Dibrom you shouldn't have taken what I said as an attack on yourself, or HA.


Perhaps you should be a little more careful about the accusations you make in the future.

Claiming that someone's genuine concerns and interests are nothing more than selfish and greedy desires to participate in illegal activity, certainly sounds like an attack to me.

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #32 –
Quote
Originally posted by JohnV
Since when??


They should sound very reasonable to anyone that doesn't have Golden Ears, artifact training and Sennheisers. (99+% of mankind, I would wildly guess)

Remember that there are lots of people satisfied with Xing at 128. For these people, Blade at 192 would be pure gold.
 

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #33 –
Quote
I'd actually question whether it was so "hard work" eventually after all.

Whether it was hard work or not, Blade is a POS, plain and simple.
Damn, I really think he should take the website down (or at least remove all the bullcrap from the quality page).

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #34 –
i mailed him twice, argumenting every weak point of his page. He promised to update it, but it didn't happen for a long time now...

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #35 –
Quote
Originally posted by rjamorim


They should sound very reasonable to anyone that doesn't have Golden Ears, artifact training and Sennheisers. (99+% of mankind, I would wildly guess)

Remember that there are lots of people satisfied with Xing at 128. For these people, Blade at 192 would be pure gold.


Hell, the general public are suckers for marketing. My girlfriend uses C90 tapes to tape the Bob Harris show off of BBC Radio 2 every weekend. Bring the white noise! hehe.

Remind me why we're here again?
rc55.com - nothing going on

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #36 –
I'm really disappointed.

Sincerly i can't understand this discussion !

>>> There's no more valid reasons to continue the MP3 development <<<

Why waste time for closed and patented codec ?




note for ruairi:

Quote
My girlfriend uses C90 tapes to tape the Bob Harris show off of BBC Radio 2 every weekend


Ehm... provide her a pantium 75 with a Sb 16...

(and Radiator is even better !)

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #37 –
Quote
Originally posted by PatchWorKs
Why waste time for closed and patented codec ?


Because this codec is supported everywhere, and no other codec came even close so far.

Besides, MP3 isn't closed. Au contraire, it's very, very open and well documented.

A good example of closed codec would be WMA. Or VQF.

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #38 –
Quote
Originally posted by rjamorim
A good example of closed codec would be WMA. Or VQF.
DTS is also highly closed.

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #39 –
I don't know *any* legal open source MP3 encoder. Do u ?

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #40 –
Quote
Originally posted by DSPguru
DTS is also highly closed.


Indeed. Other examples: MLP, DSD (not really a codec, but not documented anyway), most lossless codecs, ATRAC, SDDS, QDesign, ePAC...

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #41 –
Quote
Originally posted by PatchWorKs
I don't know *any* legal open source MP3 encoder. Do u ?


You are mixing everything.

For example: Music Jukebox uses LAME legally - JRiver pays royalty fees to FhG and Thomson.

Be Inc. used Blade legally bundled with the paid version of BeOS

So: It doesn't matters if it's open source or not. What defines legality is if  the royalty fees are paid to the patent holders.

There are quite some closed source MP3 encoders for download that I really doubt are paying anything for FhG. (Some are even free, but packed with spyware)

These are usually compilations of dist10 code anyway...

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #42 –
>Claiming that someone's genuine concerns

It is one thing to have genuine concerns, it is another to go out and try and censor the world to fit in with your views, it is called being a dictator...


>even a tin can & string is an improvement

The usual spiel...I have encoded just a ramdomly picked track (first 60 seconds as I don't advocate music theft) to 192 Kbps Lame (direct from a APE):

http://www.dbpoweramp.com/beta/Basement%20...go%20(Lame).mp3

and to Blade also at 192Kbps:

http://www.dbpoweramp.com/beta/Basement%20...o%20(Blade).mp3

Both about 1MB. Make your own decisions - BUT remember I am not advocating that you drop Lame, if you have a choice of no mp3s, I would wadger money on 99% of the population not knowing these two were different somehow. Piece of string and a can...my arse!

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #43 –
Quote
Originally posted by spoon
>Claiming that someone's genuine concerns 

It is one thing to have genuine concerns, it is another to go out and try and censor the world to fit in with your views, it is called being a dictator...


Ooh.. well, this is a sensitive bit, isn't it?

Someone once called me a messageboard Nazi... this seems along similar lines.  I laughed at that, so I'll laugh at this

But seriously, if you think you're onto me with some sort of correlation between dictatorship, censorship, and my intentions, well.. you're seriously mistaken.

I think if you open your eyes, you'll find that HA is refreshingly free from censorship, unlike most other forums.

Also, there's a big difference between favoring the idea that sites with inaccurate information would cease to exist, and forcing them out of existance in a hostile manner.

Tell me, would you call an activist who is attempting to increase awareness and provide something truly better (measurable at least to a degree) for people, who only attempts to make their point known through knowledge and discussion, a dictator?

Rather, I say the situation is more or less reversed from what you are kind of getting here.

It seems to me that if you question pre-established notions, there must be something wrong with you.  "How dare you say that these things may not be optimal, or that the time has come to retire them and move on, as better things have replaced them?  Or how dare you say that maybe we should be doing things a different way, and that we should really do everything we can to make people aware of this?  You should just sit down, shut up, and pay your respects to the pre-established notion here... you're out of line and such thoughts are dangerous."

I think the current situation is far more totalitarian and dictatorial than anything you're trying to correlate to my side.

BladeEnc officially discontinued

Reply #44 –
Hmm, people should continue this in the off-topic forum if wanted.  This thread is now closed..
Juha Laaksonheimo