[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
RE: Lower Lower Price on DDAR
- To: <ukha_d@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Lower Lower Price on DDAR
- From: "Timothy Morris" <timothy.morris@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 10:45:10 +0100
- Delivered-to: rich@xxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
1. URL?
2. What do the assembled fraternity think of this as an alternative to LAME
(which from the limited reading I have done came across as the dog's nads)?
Tim.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dr John Tankard [mailto:john@xxxxxxx]
> Sent: 02 April 2001 10:02
> To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Lower Lower Price on DDAR
>
>
>
> > Now will someone answer my original question? Will I get a
> better results
> > from using a separate ripper or will using the CDex front end
> to LAME give
> > good results.
> >
>
> I dont use either, Audio Catalyst 2.1 set for variable rate, reference
> quality
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|