[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: Paul Miller <pmiller@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 11:03:24 +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
I believe the reason you are not getting a straight forward answer is
that none of us know the answer. we are all HA guys (is there any
girls?) in here and our passion is different it is the integration,
convenience and accessibility as opposed to squeezing out every last
drop of quality from a MP3 encoder. you may find a MP3 list that would
love to discuss the quality aspects of MP3s with you.
Regards
Paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Timothy Morris [mailto:timothy.morris@xxxxxxx]
Sent: 02 April 2001 10:45
To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [ukha_d] Lower Lower Price on DDAR
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/
>
>
>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|