LAME v3.93 Changes:
Bit allocation for pre-echo control improved for single channel encodings
Substep noise shaping
Optimizations by changing data structure
Noise shaping model 2 fix
Nspsytune FIR filter clean up
Fix small psymodel bugs
Portability fixes for Tru64 UNIX
Some fixes in the DLL
Fixes for channel scaling in mono mode
Some optimizations and a faster log10 function
Some tag related fixes in the direct show filter and in the ACM codec
Fixed a mono encoding bug found by Justin Schoeman
Update to autoconf 2.53, rewrite some configure tests
Determine gcc version even with gcc 3.1
Compile shared libs on BeOS (and perhaps other arches)
Ultrasparc switches for gcc 3.1
Portability fixes for SunOS 4.x
Some fixes for VBR

And you can get it HERE

[newbie] Man, now I have to re-rip my whole collection! [/newbie]

[not a newbie, just a sucker] Man, I'm kicking myself for taking three weeks a few summers ago to "rip my cd collection just for fun using Audio Catalyst; caring about quantity rather than quality of the rips." I was just too daunted by ripping my entire CD collection to care about the quality of EVERY CD. "Ah, I won't care that the drums sound terrible in all my jazz CDs. Ah, I won't care that the violin sections sound like they are underwater on all my classical CDs." What was I THINKING! [/not a newbie, just a sucker]

Don't be too tough on yourself - a few summers ago, drive space was much more expensive, and encoders were less mature anyway. I'd hazard a guess that lame at 192CBR today might well beat Frauhoffer's '99 vintage at 256CBR in terms of quality.

The reality is that encoding your entire music collection is similar to building a new PC....there's something better available before you've even finished.

That's the truth. I just came out of the stone ages & traded out my 4/2/12x Iomega ZipCD for a 44/24/44 Yamaha CRW-F1. YEEHA! I'm rippin' away. What a difference. I just love seeing those line graphs whip from left to right.

-Zeke

Hey I can do better than that, I still have my first hp 2x. It still works I just dont use it anymore, the real kick in the head was it cost about $500 in 1997.

And just in case you are looking for the source:
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=290

I just did a quick test:
Encoding time 51.2s -> 50.9
Filesize 3398657 -> 3396268

And the new version "sounds better".

consider yourself lucky, I'm still using one of those

From what I understand 3.93 is mainly a bugfix for 3.92. Version 3.94 when released will focus more on quality of sound.

Isn't the recommendation that this release should be used only if you have the particular bug that this fixes.
They also say that the alt--presets are potentially worse quality than the previous release and we should instead wait for 3.94 if we use alt--presets.
Check out this thread for more info.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?act=ST&f=16&t=4455&s=7589f37dd064d2b7de72ae14785cf274

Yes, do NOT use this version of LAME if you use the alt presets.

I recommend using Lame 3.90.2. It's the only version that the actual creator of LAME uses (again, this is if you use the presets).

Heh,
I did that, but with a mind for quality. I ripped my entire colleciton (only 150 disks, plus about 50 from my parents) 3 TIMES!!

The third was with EAC + lame3.? + Quantum UltraVI. It's not perfect. I finally gave up. Now I just re-rip songs that don't sound good enough. I figure eventually I'll get through them all.....

Why not just rip everything at 320KBPS CBR?

3 words: snap crackle pop.

3 words: snap crackle pop.

What's that supposed to mean?
Are you saying 320 somehow adds acoustic artifacts??

I happen to own a disc with a nice divot out of it that no program could rip without a very loud scratch noise 15 seconds into the last song. It had nothing to do with my settings in LAME. But I found a ripper that did it. Wanna guess which one?

My system, for some reason, has enjoyed introducing snaps, crackles, and pops into my music. I don't know exactly why. If you'd care to use the search funtion... oh hell, here.
http://empeg.comms.net/php/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=empeg_general&Number=84045&Search=true&Forum=empeg_general&Words=snap%20crackle%20pop&Match=And&Searchpage=0&Limit=25&Old=allposts&Main=84045

Now that you mention it, I used to get random pops and clicks in mp3s while ripping under Win2K. My system is less than what you described yours as in the thread you linked to, though. Also, I used to get random skips or silences from Winamp under Win2K on perfectly good files (going back over that part of the song immediately afterward, it would always play cleanly). But that was an older version of Winamp, too.

Anyway, since I started ripping with EAC (and upgraded Winamp) I haven't had any such problem. And, CDs that I had problems ripping before no longer give me trouble, either. The only time I have errors is from mp3s that I downloaded, which isn't such a big deal. If I like what I hear, I go buy the CD.

My system, for some reason, has enjoyed introducing snaps, crackles, and pops into my music.

This is because of the combination of CD drive, ripper software, and settings. You need to try a different drive, a different PC, a different ripper, or different settings. Perhaps all of the above.

Ripping is still a black art. Wish it wasn't...

Of all these things, I'm aware. (sadly)

I've discovered (through VERY limiited testing) that my HD is the main cluprit. I have 2 75GXP drives in my system (1 has been replaced 2 times). I used to rip to them.. then encode. I changed to rip entirely to RAM and encode from there... this helped a little, but not nearly enough. I changed to EAC somewhere along the line (after the 'new and improved mmj' and audiograbber). This seemed to help, but I was back to using the HD as a storage medium.

My last attempt was to rip to my main OS drive (Quantum Ultra IV on a 39160 controller). From that drive I transfer the songs to the empeg before moving them to the 75GXP. This seems to work well. I've only 1 or 2 pops in the albums I rip.

My latest upgrade has been from an ASUS a7v333 w/xp2000 to a P4PE w/P4 2.4. I haven't ripped enough to really tell if the board might make a difference. I'll update when I have more experience with it.