quote:

Originally posted by vmc I read in a professional computer magazine that using this option in spite of this increases quality of an output file because all the lowpass filtering is eliminated. I made a test on my PC - I encoded two wave files (cd rips), one with -k option and the other without it. I think the one on which I used -k was better quality. The file was a bit bigger in size, but not more that about 300 KB. Any opinions about using this option ?

imm guesing that having the -k means that the bass is not filtered when compressing the auido, so the bass makes it into the mp3 and hence the mp3 file is a bit bigger.

its probabley down to your audio setup as to how much bass you will hear, unless you have a sub-woofer then i doubt there is really a need for the -k

___________________

Beware of killer hamsters and the random running dogs.

Well i have noticed a lack of bass on a lot of mp3s. So i think if jon is right it is very useful. Obviously the better the quality the better it will sound on a good sound system

___________________

a lowpass doesnt remove any bass, it removes all frequencies above a given cutoff point, over a defined knee. Personally i would only use -k when using 320kbps , because with -k on with lower bitrates it actually reduces the percieved quality, because the encoder is trying to crunch too much into too little

im not sure about the default cutoffs, but i think at 128k lame cuts off at 16khz, and about 18khz with higher bitrates.