Posted by: Cris
RMM 2.6 - Free MP3 Encoder ???? - 27/02/2004 13:49
It is just me, or can everyone now encode using mp3 without buying the upgrade???
Any idea what codec is being used??? It sounds really good!!!
Cheers
Cris.
Posted by: Cris
Re: RMM 2.6 - Free MP3 Encoder ???? - 27/02/2004 13:59
I think it has picked up that I have lame_enc.dll in my system32 directory that EAC usually uses!!!
Cool!!! This makes RMM THE BEST!
Thanks chaps
Cris.
Posted by: rob
Re: RMM 2.6 - Free MP3 Encoder ???? - 27/02/2004 15:45
You're welcome :-)
Anyone who already has LAME doesn't need to download it again - just make sure lame_enc.dll is in your System32 or RMM folder.
Rob
Posted by: Phoenix42
Re: RMM 2.6 - Free MP3 Encoder ???? - 27/02/2004 16:08
I'm sure this has been asked before, but I can't seem to find the answer, so I'll ask the question again: Are there any plans to have RMM connect with the empeg?
Posted by: drakino
Re: RMM 2.6 - Free MP3 Encoder ???? - 28/02/2004 02:24
I'm sure this has been asked before, but I can't seem to find the answer, so I'll ask the question again: Are there any plans to have RMM connect with the empeg?
They hope to by the time V3 is out in final form for the empeg. This though requires RMM to support a few empeg specific features, and the empeg player app switching over to the new sync protocal. Eventually it may happen, but nothing firm right now on a time frame.
Posted by: rob
Re: RMM 2.6 - Free MP3 Encoder ???? - 28/02/2004 14:00
This is starting to look less likely as Cambridge are no longer responsible for RMM (in theory).
Rob
Posted by: Cris
Re: RMM 2.6 - Free MP3 Encoder ???? - 28/02/2004 15:59
Rob,
Just out of interest, how big a job is it to add Empeg support to RMM ??? How many man hours is it likley to take?
What I'm really asking is, can we put a business case together and have it as a premium upgrade??? I'd pay for it, thats for sure.
Would others be willing to pay for an upgrade?
Cheers
Cris.
Posted by: peter
Re: RMM 2.6 - Free MP3 Encoder ???? - 28/02/2004 16:14
What I'm really asking is, can we put a business case together and have it as a premium upgrade?
There may be no need -- some of the stuff we're doing anyway for $CurrentSecretProject is going to end up making this a lot easier, so IMO there's no point busting a gut to get it done with the car-player's name on it. Although I'm still a bit worried by Rob's concern above -- in theory RMM, or at least those parts for which we've yielded responsibility elsewhere in Rio, shouldn't need to know whether it's a car-player or a Karma that it's talking to. All the skunkworking is on the side of the car-player making itself look like a Karma.
Peter