Which plugin is better? [in_mp3 AND in_!mpg123]

Aba · 23rd May 2007, 00:20

Which plugin is better?

1) in_mp3.dll(v4.06)
2) in_!mpg123.dll(v112.1)

Sawg · 23rd May 2007, 02:23

Use the plugin that comes with Winamp

Aba · 24th May 2007, 04:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Sawg
Use the plugin that comes with Winamp

What's the reason ?

Sawg · 24th May 2007, 05:07

Why wouldn't you? Nothing in_!mpg123 does that the default plugin doesn't do, really.

Yet mpg123 does not support the Media Library metadata or transcoding, and I am sure plenty of other shit.

Benski · 24th May 2007, 06:25

in_!mpg123 and in_mad were developed back when Winamp's mp3 decoder had poor sound quality. Since version 2.7 (November 2000), the mp3 decoder is provided by Fraunhofer IIS, inventors of the MP3 format, and has bit-perfect quality. Despite this, you still see occasional (incorrect) mention of mpg123 and MAD being somehow superior; they are not.

At one point, in_!mpg123 had some additional features (24bit output support, gapless playback, replay gain support), but newer versions of Winamp have also had these features for quite some time.

It's also worth mentioning that the MP3 decoding algorithm is standardized. All standards-compliant decoders will have identical quality (and output within 1-bit of each other). It is possible for a decoder to have lower quality, but this is only due to programming errors or by reducing precision to increase speed (such as when writing a decoder for an embedded application). However, it is impossible to make a decoder that has "better" quality than a standards-compliant decoder. In practice, all PC software-based MP3 decoders are identical in quality.

Aba · 24th May 2007, 09:07

Quote:

all PC software-based MP3 decoders are identical in quality.

Thank you,Benski!

23rd May 2007, 00:20	#1
Aba Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: shangri-la Posts: 14	Which plugin is better? [in_mp3 AND in_!mpg123] Which plugin is better? 1) in_mp3.dll(v4.06) 2) in_!mpg123.dll(v112.1)

23rd May 2007, 02:23	#2
Sawg Forum King Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 7,456	Use the plugin that comes with Winamp \| Brought to you by ^V ^C \| The one... the original... no seriously!

24th May 2007, 05:07	#4
Sawg Forum King Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 7,456	Why wouldn't you? Nothing in_!mpg123 does that the default plugin doesn't do, really. Yet mpg123 does not support the Media Library metadata or transcoding, and I am sure plenty of other shit. \| Brought to you by ^V ^C \| The one... the original... no seriously!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

24th May 2007, 06:25	#5
Benski Ben Allison Former Winamp Developer Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Brooklyn, NY Posts: 1,057	in_!mpg123 and in_mad were developed back when Winamp's mp3 decoder had poor sound quality. Since version 2.7 (November 2000), the mp3 decoder is provided by Fraunhofer IIS, inventors of the MP3 format, and has bit-perfect quality. Despite this, you still see occasional (incorrect) mention of mpg123 and MAD being somehow superior; they are not. At one point, in_!mpg123 had some additional features (24bit output support, gapless playback, replay gain support), but newer versions of Winamp have also had these features for quite some time. It's also worth mentioning that the MP3 decoding algorithm is standardized. All standards-compliant decoders will have identical quality (and output within 1-bit of each other). It is possible for a decoder to have lower quality, but this is only due to programming errors or by reducing precision to increase speed (such as when writing a decoder for an embedded application). However, it is impossible to make a decoder that has "better" quality than a standards-compliant decoder. In practice, all PC software-based MP3 decoders are identical in quality.