Which is better - BeSweet or HeadAC3he. And why ?

[plomon]

I've a 448Kbps 5.1 ac3 audio track. To fit into CD rips, I like to reduce the bitrate to 384Kbps. So, in order to test the quality I cut a small piece of audio and tested it by re-encoding the audio file to 384Kbps(retaining 5.1 channels) with both BeSweet v1.5b29 and the with Headac3he v0.24-a13. I found that the output from headac3he is much louder and clearer than from besweet when played in WinDVD. The same files when played in VLC media player don't tend to show that difference. I personally believe that WinDVD is the correct measuring tool for ac3 audio.

What do u guys say. Is Headac3he a better re-encoding tool than BeSweet. If yes, I need to free up a lot of hard disk space, as Headac3he requires a lot of space for audio encoding unlike BeSweet which requires absolutely no free space.

[daphy]

If yes, I need to free up a lot of hard disk space, as Headac3he requires a lot of space for audio encoding unlike BeSweet which requires absolutely no free space.
AFAIK the space you will need depends on the methode inside headac3 -> there are three diffrent types.

If you like to convert more than one file give WaveWizard (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=95265&highlight=wavewizard) a chance, it´s more confortable for such routines. The encoding part is the same as in headac3 - the second AC3ENC.DLL is much newer than the one I once packed inside Headac3he v0.24-a13! :D