Hi, lets start, despite the test tomorrow

1. • "cut down the stereo effect (so called joint stereo)"

joint stereo doesn't destroy the stereo effects. This statement may be true for xing encoders but not for the latest Lame Versions. It is even used in some high quality presets at 320 kbps! and the stereo effect or stereo image is completely intact!

Read up here:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1081

2. • "BladeEnc is a very different mp3 encoder (compared to Fraunhofer, LAME etc) with a very unique approach to mp3 encoding"

If I remember correctly Blade is in a certain way changed iso sourcecode and the things haven't improved very much regarding quality as many listening tests show.

Read up here:
www.ff123.net

3. •  "BladeEnc really shines at 256 kbps and sucks at anything less than 128 kbps"

Lame is definately better at high bitrates may it be CBR, ABR or VBR as listening tests proved to. See linked page in point 2.

4. • " that left joint stereo encoding on at 256 kbps, seriously limiting the quality "

this may be true for the fraunhofer Encoder but is certainly wrong for the latest lame versions! see point 1.

5. • "You can also get strange phasing effects in some rare cases with joint stereo."

In no single case with Lame's joint stereo and in fact joint stereo never caused flanging effects in lame, maybe in some other bad joint stereo implementations

6. • " Filtering out  the higher frequencies is generally a good idea when dealing with low bitrates and depending on circumstances might also be a good idea at medium bitrates, but is a bad idea when dealing with high bitrates.  Some encoders therefore have different filterlevels for different bitrates."

Again wrong. High frequencies can cause a big decrease in quality even at high bitrates so your statement is completely wrong. Most of the problems with mp3 are caused by high frequencies as mp3 can't handle them very good due some sfb21 issues

You wanted to know who said that points on your website are myths. No one said so. I noticed them myself as i spent some time learning about mp3 in the r3mix forum and at hydrogenaudio.org. I could easily tell them from the right point of view and if you want to discuss quality issues i strongly suggest you to discuss with dibrom or tangent at hydrogenaudio.org. This way you could tune Blade to the best quality which is possible. I think this is all that you and the Blade users want. I also like to see these joint stereo and VBR myths disappearing as uninitiated users which don't know about mp3 believe this "bullshit" Sorry but this is the only word to tell these things the right way.

Now I'd like to comment on your mail:

7. • "I could go on and on about the details, but the fact is that you can NEVER
     make a clear statement as to which encoder produces better result than the
     other. I've had a lot of sample clips sent to me where BladeEnc either has
     performed notably worse or notably better than Lame."

This may be true for old encoders but in recent lame versions, regarding the alt-presets lame is the best codec for all bitrates and all types of music!

Read up here:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=260

8. • "For general 128-160 kBit encoding of mainstream music for listening through
     mid-quality computer speakers I recommend Lame."

You cannot overread the sarcasm in this statement, declassing lame as a low end codec. Sorry but i think it is funny to hear this from the author of an mp3 codec which does not perform better then lame or even worse in most cases.

9. • "I also recommend BladeEnc for encoding of all kinds of music at 256 kBit or higher."

Sorry but Lame offers higher quality than every other codec at high bitrates, may it be CBR, ABR or VBR. This is a fact, please test is for yourself.

10. • "I haven't kept up with LAME's development for more than a year though, so
      some information might be out of date."

Very true. Please don't see this mail as bloody critic. Please don't. I only want to help blade to become better and this is and should be in everybody's interest!

11. • "Could you please inform me who has made statements that these facts are
      myths? And what facts those statements are based upon?"

Please visit www.hydrogenaudio.org and talk to the lame developers. I think they are willing to help to improve your encoder!!!

If you want more information feel free to contact me

Bye
Benni

Hier ist was er genatwortet hat

Hi Benni,
Thanks for your notes and information. I will follow the links you gave me
and judging from some of the information it seems that it's time to update my
quality section again.
I'm also quite busy too so I'm sure it will take some time, but I intend to
look it through and discuss my findings with you.
Best Regards,
Tord Jansson

So nun das Fazit, auch wenn jemand einen mp3 encoder schreibt heisst es noch lange nicht dass er Ahnung davon hat ;D Wenigstens hat ers eingesehen, dass es Zeit ist seine Seite upzudaten. Bloss wann ?

Für Vorschläge bin ich offen