Slashdot Mirror
Ogg The Conqueror? RC2 Is Out
jonathan_ingram writes: "There has been a lot of discussion recently in Slashdot about sound compression formats. Much has been focused on
Ogg Vorbis, but the most recent version available has been a beta released in Feburary.
Today, RC2 of Vorbis
has been released. The most important of the
many changes
is
channel coupling,
which means that Vorbis can now encode bitsteams at a much lower
bitrate than before.
Try it out today!"
oggenc (vorbis-tools) has a WAV reader you can use for input. libao has a WAV writer you can use for output. So yes the answer can be ogg.
or if he's using a windows box he could go for Monkey's Audio!
http://www.monkeysaudio.com/
I just love the name
Perhaps they could even optimize the ".1" in "5.1" for low frequency effects.
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
Why the Hell would you want to encode an MP3 to Ogg? Unless it's a wave or aif you NEVER want to recompress audio. Same thing goes for video. The end result will be crap all the time.
Another way would be to drive those big thumping punk speakers through my neighborhood and see if you get pulled over.
~~~
When this was first introduced the joke was that Ogg would be safe as long as we don't meet any alien races with more than 255 ears :)
--
GCP
uhh, THX isn't any kind of sound format (such as DD 5.1, DTS, etc)..it's just a certification for quality...ya monkey...
First off, I like the name.
Secondly, does it have anything to do with Terry Pratchett and the Discworld novels? There's a character called Nanny Ogg, and the Grand Vizier in Pyramids! (I think) was called Vorbis (or was it the high-priest in Small Gods?)
stitchattarkadahl.co.uk
oh - please, look at ambisonic it's perfect for audiophiles and... hmm - got patented so long ago that the patent expired by now
Reality check: bzip2 gets nowhere near the compression of a special lossless audio compressor.
--
GCP
This is only really relevant if the data on his hard drive is only valued as being confidential. In that case, your argument makes sense, as he has lost $2,000 due to loss of confidentiality. Most music has no confidentiality value, so this doesn't apply. Otherwise, he still has the data on his drive, so he hasn't really lost anything. For sake of argument, let's say you "stole" all his MP3's. Has he lost anything? Can he not listen to his MP3's anymore? Sure he can. Loss to him: $0. And finally, if you destroyed all the MP3's on his drive, that's a different matter altogether.
>Why would you want lower bitrates?
Streaming
--
GCP
Wasn't there an OGG_THE_CAVEMAN? That's what I always think of.
How do you pronnounce it, anyway? (This is going to be one of those darn "gif" things, isn't it?)
Dude we don't care. Just give us our Okama GameSphere.
Here are two reasons why some users will want to switch to Ogg Vorbis:
For me, the second one was the killer. Try it yourself! Pick a challenging piece, and encode it with LAME and Ogg Vorbis at the same bitrate, listen to both files, and see which sounds better.
Free Mac Mini
If your apathy leads you down the path of least resistance (mp3, microsoft windows, insert-proprietary-patented-method-here), you are doing your part to ensure the dominance of bad companies and bad patents.
Think of it like voting. Your apathy will cost you your freedom.
I wish people wouldn't support proprietary software companies. I don't see why people bitch about Microsoft and then think Apple should get a free ride.
There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, General Electric, and Exxon
(everybody loves oversimplification)
Ogg Vorbis's popularity will be proportional to the enforcement of the MP3 patent(s?).
It doesn't have to be popular to serve a purpose. The mere threat of a completely free format waiting in the wings could just mean that MP3 is effectively free, aside from a few particularly litigation-sensitive companies paying patent royalties.
I'm sure more than one group has replied to UNISYS intimidation with, "We could be using PNG tomorrow."
---
You'd be surprised at the broadband connection available to things crawling around in your hair.
But what if I grow a 256th ear?
Then you will already have Big Problems that overshadow the limitations of the file format. Good luck finding headphones. I can't even find 3-eared headphones.
So you say we ought to call it Ogg instead of Ogg Vorbis?
This must be the exact counterpart of RMS's "GNU/Linux" crusade!
For sake of argument, let's say you "stole" all his MP3's. Has he lost anything? Can he not listen to his MP3's anymore? Sure he can. Loss to him: $0.
Wrong. Because the MP3 format is a "pay-per-download" format, he will have to download all of his MP3 files again. This will cost over four thousand dollars. Loss to you: $0.
Thief.
You said it only rips at 0.6x. I ripped many classical, metal, electronic, etc, CDs using GRIP and the oggenc that comes with Slackware. On a TBird 1Ghz. I get a min 2.5x. At max, I see as high as 3.5-4x.
You must be doing something very wrong, or you're lieing.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Grrrr... bloody Slashdot content mangling...
I meant, of course:
For instance, any unmodified app reading "Buffett-Volcano.mp3" would actually be reading the output of something that worked like "wav2mp3<Buffet-Volcano.wav"
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
Uh, yes it
is.
(Ever read down the very left side of your slashdot window?)
an SB Live! ?!? You can't be serious, not only do they ONLY do 48khz (anything below that is upsampled on the fly on output), but they also have PCI bus utilisation issues. I've currently got an SB Live Platinum, and when I get around to it, I'm replacing it with a Turtle Beach Santa Cruz
Christ would have used ogg.
Isn't that enough?
The floor takes care of that. Vorbis' psy model is the most advanced currently used, with it's fine spectral quantization control...
The channel coupling is highly effective.
I agree that it's not practical to re-encode mp3's to oggs. You only want to re-encode if you have the originals or the quality will suffer badly.
:) In economic terms you're creating a demand.
To answer your question about anyone caring if you re-encode, that's easy to answer. If you start encoding with Ogg, then you will be receptive to products that support Ogg in the future, so you will probably end up supporting hardware vendors who pick up the format. If you never use Oggs, you'll be less likely to notice/reward the makers of Ogg hardware
I have maybe 30 or 40 songs I downloaded but on a 56k modem line just more trouble than its worth...
it doesn't excite me too hear about yet another audio codec that produces lossy audio files
You're not going to get much compression if you go lossless. Popular lossless LPC codecs such as shorten and flac only pack files to 40% to 60% of their original size because they spend most of their bandwidth on coding incompressible noise.
If your audience uses human ears, you don't really want "lossless"; you want "transparent." It's already been shown that golden ears can't distinguish a 1.4 Mbps 44.1 kHz stereo wav from a 256 kbps MP3 file encoded with LAME. OGG's improved psychoacoustics and quantization techniques (including channel coupling that's stronger than simple mid-side) can go deep into territory MP3 doesn't dare go.
Will I retire or break 10K?
MP3 was first, it's not best. There are problems, they chose not to fix them in MP3, rather, they are introducing MP3Pro.
-- Patience is a virtue, but impatience is an art.
Did he use a 44.1khz sample? Ogg currently only works with 44.1khz, if he fed it a "professional" file then it was probably 48khz and the playback would be 10% slower then the original.
I don't see why it should be considered anything more than avoiding license costs. They didn't include a DVD player either, after all. (I thought it was funny that they want me to play DVDs in Media Player, but in order to do so, I have to buy a competing product.)
Anyway, since you'll be able to buy an MP3 pack and a DVD pack (hopefully for about $5 or whatever the license is), this all doesn't matter.
The name isn't even very sexy. OGG? Isn't that a sound a caveman makes?
True 'dat. Also, theres the question of lossy compression. I've got quite a few mp3s here that've taken me *years* to find, and often the only ones i can get hold of are taped-off-the-radio-compressed-to-shit-and-distort ed-a-bit-for-good-measure copies. so won't re-compressing them to '.ogg' just for the hell of it only worsenize things?
Is there someone else up there we can talk to?
"I submit that, even if it fails the "classical music test", that's ok, because those guys probably don't do a lot of MP3 and won't do much ogg either. But it does need to cope with techno, trance, rave, and singers. It needs to be able to do Brittney Spears (gag), even." and I submit that you, sir, are making a stereotype...I keep a large, QUALITY classical mp3 (and growing ogg, btw) collection. Just because I don't like the ummmm "music" that you listen to (yes you and billions of others, and I'll still always refer to the "music" as "music" because it IS only "music"). The "music" isn't known for it's complexity (whereas classical (and romantic and baroque etc...) were for the most part, BASED in complexity (complexity of texture, of tone, and lots of other terms many people don't know exist)), so the "classical music test" SHOULD be the de facto test for an encoding scheme. The rest of that "music" will fall in line. And don't even try to say that it's just because I'm old...unless you consider almost 20 as old? --Jubedgy
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis hebes
But what if I grow a 256th ear?
If the "this" you refer to in the subject is the content of your message then the answer is yes.
"I mean, sure ogg vorbis is not encumbered by patents, and that is surely a good thing. But the whole purpose of MP3, Ogg Vorbis, ATRAC and all these other digital music compression algorithms is to make it easier/more cost effective for people to steal the music they want, rather than pay for it."
The point is to reduce the cost of use. A radio station does not have to pay usage fees to the people that created the cd audio format, why should internet radio have to for their audio format.
"I am fed up to the back teeth of these criminal scum who ruthlessly and without any conscience whatsoever steal music and then brag about it on IRC."
We have reached a point where a band can produce a cd and sell it on the internet at a much more convenient price then the record labels are doing. Which begs the question: Who is stealing the music?
"Last week some guy was saying how he had about 40 Gigabytes of 'ripped' MP3s on his machine. By my calculations (assume a CD cost $14) that means he has stolen the equivalent of about $30000."
You may be happy to fork over your hard earned cash paying for something you already paid for, but most of us are not. Copyright was not intended to give perfect control to the copyright holder. Any solution to the issue of stealing needs to be handled in a way that does not infringe on my right to copy stuff I paid for onto my computer then copy that copy to any other computer/device/file format that I choose to use in the future.
Later, Seeker
"I'll take the organized patterns of chaos over the chaotic organizations of man, any day."
(Iommi/Tankian/Marlette)
Yeah, first time I encoded a track in ogg vorbis (don't quite remember which one it was anymore...) I was floored with how different it sounded. Maybe I've gotten too used to mp3s and was looking for something new, but to my ears ogg vorbis sounds much, much better.
--Jubedgy
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis hebes
Is this a troll or do those question marks mean you actually want to engage people here in a discussion on this topic? If the second is true, are you insane?
Vorbis developer Nick D'Amato has a working Quicktime component that lets Quicktime Player, the Quicktime plugin, iTunes, and any other QT app play vorbis files. See this thread from vorbis-dev for details, and download the plugin to help test it out.
Your Ears. [Genetics Professor's Patent Pending]
Since it seems I'm not the only one facing the problem of deciding what format to use and yet wanting to avoid ever having to re-rip an entire CD collection, I'm going to ask if anyone's already solved this the obvious way:
A few Assumptions/Observations:
1) Every CD ripper (at least internally, if not as an explicit step) rips to WAV first, and then encodes to whatever compressed format is desired.
2) Hard disks are getting so big and cheap that it's now possible to contemplate storing the raw WAV or CDA files (BTW: Is the difference in these two? Only the header?)
3) Compatibility with various players (whether home component players like the Audiotron or portable MP3/WMA players) is required, but this is where it's hard to make a call as to what we'll want in the future.
Proposed/Possible Solution:
It seems then, that the "obvious" solution is to store the audio on disk in WMA format (remember #2 above - size has been declared irrelevant by fiat!), and filter/encode/convert it on the fly into other formats as needed by the varios player software and hardware.
On Unix-based systems, this could be easily done with a minor addition to a jukebox program that in addition to creating and managing the real WMA files would also create and manage symbolic links that pointed to a named pipe or a program that checks its $0 to see what it should grab and how it should massage it. (For instance, any unmodified app reading "Buffett-Volcano.mp3" would actually be reading the output of something that worked like "wav2mp3So, does anyone know of an audio management app that takes this approach to things? Other than the fact that it uses more space (see #2 above *again*), this seems like the most flexible way to future-proof an audio library. This sort of thing would make it possible to simultaneously support audio hw/sw that uses common (MP3 and WMA(yeck)) or not-yet-common (Ogg, etc.) without having to go re-rip hundreds of CDs from scratch every six months to support a new format or version.
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
160 is low bitrate? I hope you mean 160 bytes/sec?
I can see the banner ad now... Ogg the monkey and win!
Never mind Spamassassin. When's Spammerassassin coming out?
MP3 is just MP3, you can't put Vorbis in that
;)
Ogg is sortof like AVI/ASF, with Vorbis being the MP3 and Tarkin being the DivX
--
GCP
I'd love to try this on my ipaq, especially since file size is more of an issue for mobile devices (please no flames about ce ;-)
someone mod my parent up. funniest comment i've seen in days.
sig?
The reason MP3 picked up quickly was because everyone was sharing their music as MP3. If you build it, they will come. In the same way, convert all your MP3s to OGG (which is a good idea) and share them as OGGs.
I'm sure P2P systems will include support for OGG sharing shortly.
Speaking of which, what current P2P networks support OGG files in their search mechanism for Audio files?
OT, but...
I don't think that MS artificially limiting the encoder bitrate will help Ogg at all. Rather, it will encourage XP users to use wma, which, conveniently, is installed right along side the mp3 encoder.
Can you imagine your (mother|father|grandparents|dog) saying "Hmm...this mp3 sounds shoddy, I think I'll go install this complete other encoder that I've never heard of that none of my friends use", rather than "Hmm...this mp3 sounds shoddy, I think I'll use this other encode that's right here, endorsed by MS and compatible with 90% of the PCs bought in the past two years"?[1]
The way that I'm trying to help Ogg amongst my friends is by encoding all my CDs in Ogg format, and sharing them around. If anyone wants to listen to them, they have to go and get the Winamp (or Sonique, etc...) plugin to listen to it. This way, a whole lot of my friends have been exposed to this new format. A few of them have liked the quality enough to try to figure out how to encode their own CDs in this format.
[1]True, I can't see anyone I know saying either, but this is Slashdot; don't let the facts get in the way of a good point, right?
http://zorannt.sourceforge.net/
Hey, lay off the punch bowl man... its not as dumb as it looks.
--
"Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." - Homer Simpson [1F10]
Linux "games" are mere shadows of their Windows counterparts. As an example, Quake III Arena, which I downloaded as per my Fair Use laws, ran at 40 frames per second in Windows XP RC2 (downloaded per Fair Use laws). I deleted both within my 24-hour trial period, since this was for educational purposes only.
I proceeded to download "Quake" "III" "Arena" for "Linux" (per "Fair" "Use" "Laws") and I found that I was getting only 20 frames per second. That's only HALF as much as in Windows.
Windows wins. Enjoy knowing that by saving $100 on not getting a real OS, you'll be enjoying half the performance on your games.
I see alot of posts basically asking the question:
.. if people are unhappy with mp3s (they'll be unhappy with the low bitrate in the XP-bundled encoder, but same difference to the average Joe), they will search for an alternative. Hark! Ogg to the rescue!
"I don't think Ogg is as good as compression X, so why use it?"
Answers:
- You don't have to use it. Just support it. Be aware of it's existance. One day, it may be better than compression X.
- Should MP3 technology get hijacked by the corperate world (more so than it is today), we have an alternative that works, even if you feel it isn't the best sound in the world.
- Two researchers working on the same goal in different streams and parts of the world is a Good Thing (tm). Prevents information hoarding and management on bahalf of corperate interests.
(going off memory for the rest of this, maybe I'm wrong in some claims)
Interestingly enough, XP includes an mp3 encoder, but it only encodes up to some stupidly low bitrate (128? 64?). Since many people won't go out looking for another encoder, they will blindly encode at low bitrates.
Ironically, in the long run, I think mp3s popularity will help Ogg
People will always look at the "is X better than Y" when comparing technologies. What they are missing is that many, many industries are as far ahead as they are right now due to competing projects by seperate scientific/mathematical efforts. Finally, seperate projects also allow for validation of efforts. If, in some far off evil world, mp3s patent owner X says, "I can't improve sound quality, because that would break this and that.", a seperate camp of researchers can say, "bullshit! you're just saying that because MS is paying to help drive users to windows media". Or whatever the case may be.
The value of parallel research is almost always more than the sum of the parts.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Err, I believe he was talking about the fact that iTunes/Quicktime can update itself with new codecs automatically from Apple, and users can add their own. This has nothing to do with Sorensen. You are full of shit buddy. Go write your own open source Sorensen codec if you want it.
Just FYI -
Don't know if it's online, too, but there's a nice piece of page 1, Section B on Ogg V. and C. Montgomerey.
Oh GOD! Hehehe, that's pretty fucking cool. I'm glad CmdrTaco is a clueless bastard. About the only thing that fucking lame-ass ASCII art filter catches is when someone tries to add one too many punctuation marks. And that's something he should let through. God, that's fucking funny.
Stupidity never felt so good.
Congratulations to the OV team. While I haven't used it for a while, when I did it seemed quite nice.
Having said that what I currently use, which is MP3s, sound great and they work great, so why should I as Joe Consumer care about OV? What sort of license fees does the MP3 patent owner (Fraunhofer?) put on companies such as Winamp, or do they only charge MP3 ripper type products?
I guess my question is this: If I don't have a religious problem with patents, why should I care about alternatives if they're only as good as MP3?
Hi, before I perfomed the release today, I mirroed all the distribution files on my box. http://www.linuxpower.cx/~greg/v/. - Greg Maxwell
Ooo, point. I have a little code cleanup to do for 68k...
Monty
I encode everything with ogg vorbis now. No, you don't have to give up your mp3's. I still have a lot of them. I still download them. But i only encode ogg now, and I would advise others to do so too. If you are looking for a free open-source, easy to use encoder for windows, check out cdex http://cdex.n3.net. It is one of the best cd rippers / encoders out there. We all need to tell our friends to encode ogg now. It sounds much better than mp3.. it is great.
>Although it is possible that the casette input amp is less accurate near the low end than the CD input amp, I doubt it.
You're basically sending the singal through two totally different paths. Additionally, the CD input is likely to be of higher quality than the casette input (why make that good?).
I think your test was flawed.
--
GCP
And, if you read the FAQ, you'll find out that Netrek is exactly where the Ogg part came from. To quote:
Pretty clear evidence that Netrek was the origin of the name.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
You might try to compile the Unix/Linux source code. Don't know if it will work, but it's always worth a try.
Hi.
Multiple audio channels for music, which is often encoded in stereo, is not really necessary.
ID3V1 for mp3 is a hack, however, ID3V2 for mp3 allows arbitrary length fields. no, it is not as warm and fuzzy as vorbis comments.
MP3 and WMA work _better_ on portable players, since they are less computationally intensive and have a smaller footprint. Additionally, people who use portable players typically have crappy headphones, so audio quality is not the biggest factor.
WMA allows 48kHz audio. It doesn't matter much because the vast majority of hardware out there only plays back at 44kHz.
The quality of the encoder is only an argument now because there is only one encoder. Have no fear that someone will go out and make a faster, lower quality ogg encoder at some point. These Things Happen.
In general you make a decent argument for Vorbis, but the technical and accoustic merits don't outweigh the real world downsides of switching content to a new format.
-- Patience is a virtue, but impatience is an art.
The AVC Soul Player portable MP3 CD player features upgradable firmware, which might in future include Ogg Vorbis support.
http://www.easybuy2000.com
It is my goal to replace my wife and my CD collection of 400-500 discs ...
Current version of Ogg Vorbis can only do the later :-)
What's with the patent pending topic logo??
I wish Apple's iTunes supported Ogg Vorbis.
Ben "You have your mind on computers, it seems."
I just cant get used to seeing Konquerer with a C.
Is patented. So is THX. I don't think there are any un-patented 5.1 channel codecs around. Maybe the DVD-Audio. But I don't think the OV guys will be doing it.
Best Slashdot Co
Our "The Name Sucks!"/"The name Rulez!" mail ratio is about 50/50. Some of you have threatened to kill us if we change the name, some of you have threatened to kill us if we don't. So you're gonna hear what I think about it. I'm not going to waste the opportunity my minor fame gives me for a healthy round of peer-mockery.
<tongue-in-cheek>
<neeneer-neener>
I Like The Name. I Wrote the Software. The Name Stays. </neener-neener>
But there's more to this story than 'nyah nyah'. The 'rename Ogg!' forces have provided me with some of my favorite mail ever. I recall fondly the guy who went on, in great detail, why 'Ogg Vorbis' sucks, and that I must adopt 'a cutting edge, truly kick-ass name like "FreeMP3"!!!!!'
As for 'Ogg Vorbis', I hadn't really meant the 'Vorbis' part to get tacked on. The name of the format is Ogg. Just Ogg. Vorbis happens to be the first codec. Had 'Vorbis' been perhaps one more syllable (like, say 'Sorensen'), we wouldn't have this problem. People would just call it 'Ogg' like God (that's me) intended. Of course, particularly obsessive people *do* occasionally say 'QuickTime Sorensen', but they don't get invited to parties much, and when invited, they are shunned. 'Course they're usually just arguing with the punch bowl so shunning is easy.
I don't want my users to be shunned at parties, so I'm gonna help you out here. Just call it 'Ogg'. Ogg is a good, simple, very satisfying word.
It makes a good noun, a better verb and can even be used effectively in a curse. It is a real word and contains no numbers. It has only two unique characters, making it simpler than mp3. It is only one syllable, making it shorter to say than mp3. If you still can't handle it, try reboot-reinstall.
</tongue-in-cheek>
Monty
xiph.org
FYI, I have been using this for my MP3 jukebox:
webplay.sourceforge.net
I looked at a couple hundred jukebox projects and this was the one that met my needs best. It even lets you play the files ON the file server, if it has a sound card... so my jukebox is a P200 hidden behind the stereo. Webplay can do simultaneous streams to other computers on your LAN too, if you want. Cool stuff.
Unfortunately the poster didn't mention this, so I will.
This is a tuning release. Although all infrastructure like channel coupling is in place, the encoder itself is not ideally tuned yet. One of the goals of this release is to get people to test the new modes and report possible problems (samples were it goofs up). If you do this, be sure to try a blind test. Your mind _will_ play tricks on you otherwise.
Two known problems currently are pre/postecho on some really hard samples, and occasional 'hissing' in the low bitrate modes (< 160).
Both are known and will be fixed in the very near future. RC3 is already expected next week.
--
GCP
Sitting here streaming MP3's over to my PJB100 (www.pjbox.com), *WISHING* I could use .ogg files instead.
Come on COMPAQ, what's it going to take to get you to loosen things up a bit on the PJB100 specs so we can get Ogg ported to it?
Thought Compaq used to be cool with OSS-style development, but then I got a PJB100...
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
m00.
I hate to say it, but only you can eventually ditch your mp3's. At this point, the sound quality is almost comparable (if not the same). I truly believe that the people that complain about ogg not having the sound quality of mp3 are just to lazy to try and find out if their is a difference.
.ogg files.
And if their is, take one for the team! Stop using mp3's, and completely reencode your entire cd collection into
Oh, so it again comes down to "even if we're not as good technically, support us anyway out of sheer principle". Give those of us without bullshit political motivation a reason to switch and I'll happily do so.
---
Slashdot: News For Zealots. Stuff That's Hypocritical.
Ogg the Conqueror?
Close. It's Oog the Caveman. But nice try.
Cool. Can I reply to the Troll, Mommy?
Yes, dear, but make it quick
I mean, sure ogg vorbis is not encumbered by patents, and that is surely a good thing. But the whole purpose of MP3, Ogg Vorbis, ATRAC and all these other digital music compression algorithms is to make it easier/more cost effective for people to steal the music they want, rather than pay for it.
Bull. Pure and simple. That's like saying roads make it easier for robbers to flee a bank job.
Last week some guy was saying how he had about 40 Gigabytes of 'ripped' MP3s on his machine. By my calculations (assume a CD cost $14) that means he has stolen the equivalent of about $30000.
Hmm. Since "ripped" is not synonymous with "ripped off" but instead means merely copying audio data encoded on a cd to a data file on a hard drive, I see no indication of any wrong doing here. I have about 20 gigs of songs ripped on my computer at home. All from cd's I own, and all expressly permitted by law.
Thanks for letting me play with the troll!
It's a good question, and points to the transition difficulty Ogg faces. But it does go beyond mere political or philosophical desires. What we're seeing in proprietary formats from the high (DVD video) to the low (PDF Text) ends of the multimedia spectrum is that inevitably greed and the fear of individual control over the bits creates a situation where the media is purposely devalued to create economic control. DVD country codes are about artificially reduced values. CSS "encryption" is about artificially reduced value. A PDF that will only play on one or two machines is about artificially reduced value. A totally open, patent-free, non-proprietary format theoretically allows people to seek the true, full value of a digital media format. Now, the counter-argument is that by eliminating the profit motive from formats/media, the drive to innovation is removed. We'll see (I mean thak god we've got those strong patents on the manufacture of flat surfaces from tree pulp or printing woulda NEVER taken off) - meaning, we'll actually see. If the former model is right, Ogg will inevitably overtake proprietary formats in value and in the end format will be free - the way most CDs are right now. If not, the lack of commercial incentive to improve Ogg will mean that there are always competitive proprietary formats like MP3 audio competing with totally free formats like Ogg
Ahhhhh.... that's great. That's the first ascii art I've seen that made me laugh out loud.
Bravo my good chap, Bravo
...try encoding some progressive metal, with tasty cymbal work and generaly complicated sounds. classical music is very "symmetric" compared to the sudden waveform changes of drums (a lot of bass and a lot of treble).
As a rule of thumb (my thumb at least), you can tell an encoding by the cymbals.
i could tell apart a lame-encoded mp3 at 320kb (as high as it could go anyway and respective quality for stereo etc) from a cd-rip (cdex).
I have a pair of koss's cans. I used the fraunhofer mp3 player (lets just use the standard, ok?). Album was "Fragile art of Existance" of Control Denied.I could tell the mp3 from the original even if i didn't know which it was.
Looking for people to chat about multicopters, coding, music. skype: gtsiros
That is correct.
(and that's why I bought an amp with digital input, plus a simple cheap little soundcard with the C-Media CMI8738 chip on it (SPDIF out). Now all I have to do is install the board and run the wire).
Now only remains this question: If it's better, then how do I upgrade my portable MP3/CD player to Ogg? Does AIWA make a CDC-Ogg yet like the CDC-MP3 they have for in the car? Damn.
btw, what is TMTOWTDI?
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
I was downloading vorbis RC2 and all of a sudden the site went to a crawl... Hmm, wonder if they posted the release on Slashdot? Sure enough.
Doh! You guys could have at least let me finish my download *G*
Toddlers are the stormtroopers of the Lord of Entropy.
Don't use that link -- in the best case, Google's cache is old, and this is nowhere near best-case.
I am fed up to the back teeth of these criminal scum who ruthlessly and without any conscience whatsoever steal music and then brag about it on IRC.
Last week some guy was saying how he had about 40 Gigabytes of 'ripped' MP3s on his machine. By my calculations (assume a CD cost $14) that means he has stolen the equivalent of about $30000.
If he stole that from a bank he would quite rightly be in prison. Are we supposed to think it is a lesser crime, simply because he used a computer ?
What is currently being done in the matter of multi-channel compressed audio? At this point, all of these formats seem to support stereo only. It doesn't seem like it would be that hard to implement a Dolby Digital compression algorithm. There is currently limited support for the format outside of DVDs but the music that is out there is impressive. Perhaps the OV guys could put something together after they finalize this format?
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
incredibly intuitive, springs-to-infant's-tongue "emm pee three"?! :) Or "double-u emm eh"?
...
:)
I dunno, that sounds like something the kids in the old Life cereal commercial would say in refusing the tasty cereal because of the name, until the smarter (?) little one ate some first.
If you really don't want to use it because of the name, you could a) never use it b) pretend that it has a different name or b) start a competing project to bring patent-free music compression to the masses
I just think it's pretty cool that they didn't go with some marketing-centric psuedo-scientific, Brand-Nu Pefect World name involving "cyber" or UglyMixedCaps or ending in "Pro," "Plus" or "Extreme." Remember, Ogg Vorbis, with funny / interesting literary references available to those who seek, could have been named "NRJ-CYBER/MusicProPlus Extreme II (lite)" They made the name, it's their decision
It's like cute penguins in Linux distros, or shucking uncomfortably hot suits in a climate that mocks them. What's the point of forgoing pleasure in one's everyday activity, even (or especially) when doing something as cool as this? What's the gain?
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
If there is any correlation at all you can losslessly compress them with fewer bits and still produce bit for bit identical output.
... the problem is with the lossy compression, if it's still the same as with previous versions, then it cannot sound good. Compression ratio is a minor interest when the psychoacoustic models are not realistics (and Vorbis has terrible models compared to VQF, ASF or even MP3). One note about channel coupling: in real world, you can find very similar frequencies in both l/r channels, but when sampled they are rarely bit-per-bit the same => to be efficient, you need to approximate the l/r redundant datas => approximation is the base of lossy compression so you cannot use the words "lossless" or "bit-for-bit"
Is there a codec available for Windows Media Player (7/8)?
I hope you meant re-rip, instead of convert, which would definitely not be a good idea. If you convert mp3s to oggs then you will hear the artifacts from the 2 lossy encoders.
Coupling is there.... you just can't override the hardwired stereo model selection right now.
Monty
hey pal,
ogg vorbis name sucks. No matter how you like it, it sound as dorky as possible. Just because of the name I wont try it. Find a better name, and I will take a look. Until then, good luck.
(would you drive a "Ford Luzer"? same argument)
In your opinion. Mine is that, pound for pound, MP3s have a less-tinny sound. Who's right?
The political motivation is *not* bullshit. For me, the issues at stake are just a bit more important than my existing mp3 collection. It's sad that so many people are so lazy and shortsighted.
Lazy and shortsighted? That's zealotry, plain and simple. Ogg doesn't play on a lion's share of existing hardware, produces (again, purely my opinion) inferior sounding files and isn't different enough in any way to warrant more than a glance from hardware manufacturers anytime soon. I assume that the original "take one for the team" means using a solution that is missing functionality in order to forward political goals which I personally don't care about. As a result, I'm lazy and shortsighted? Pure crap, but not surprising.
Aside from the obvious pirate music angle which affects Ogg the same as MP3, there are no legal or ethical reasons for an individual to switch. Hence, any calls to arms is based on nothing but bullshit politics.
---
Slashdot: News For Zealots. Stuff That's Hypocritical.
One problem I've had with MP3 is that I have yet to find any player that will play consecutive MP3 files with absolutely no break in the audio stream between files. It seems that every one of them has to close the old file, open the new file, read some information, then finally start decoding. In the meantime, there's been a split second break in audio output. Not good for live CDs or any time two tracks continuously merge together. I looked at the API for decoding Ogg to raw audio and it looked perfect to write my own simple player to solve this. I could simply buffer enough audio data that there would be no "skip" in output when switching input files. Perfect.
Then I did some comparisons with sound quality. With Ogg RC1, I encoded part of Mussorgsky's Pictures At An Exhibition to both Ogg and MP3 at around 200kbs VBR. The MP3 sounded perfect but the Ogg had audible clicks and pops. Sorry, but that just wasn't acceptable. So I scrapped that idea and went back to MP3, continuing what I had started. I would have to look into another solution to solve the break-between-tracks problem.
I'm now about 2/3 done with the encoding and this happens? ;-) Honestly I'm not sure whether I want the quality to be improved... If it is, I'll be tempted to start over, which is a lot of work. If it isn't, I don't get the benefits of Ogg... Hmmm. I'll give it a try and see what happens, though.
Say hello to zMac.
And this is only sorta OT, because the answer might be Ogg.
This could really help me. If you know of anything, reply.
Emai: dbentley@stanford dot it's-a-university
I downloaded some vorbis software just to see what it was like and encoded a favorite song into the format. I also encoded it with the same bitrate (128kbps) as an MP3 using iTunes, and compared both with the original CD using the same earphones (Sony MDR-NC5) on same computer (Powerbook G4).
Vorbis beat MP3 hands down. It sounds fresher, more alive, more vibrant. The stereo separation is much better. Vorbis is, to my untrained ears and with the song I selected for a sample ("Quick" by Eddie From Ohio), indistinguishable from the original CD. The MP3, by comparison, sounded flat and dead.
I'm switching my computer-based music listening to Ogg Vorbis at once. I hadn't planned to, I had just thought it would be interesting to play with, but I'm now a convert. I will buy a portable digital audio player as soon as somebody makes one that supports the Ogg Vorbis format.
Why would you want lower bitrates?
This question is moderated as "Flamebait". Often moderators don't do very well, I think. The emphasis seems to be on disapproving, rather than approving.
This is a reasonable question. And here is an answer: I'd like to use lower bit rates to make smaller audio files. I do international tech support sometimes, and speaking is 5 times faster than writing. Sometimes an audio file is the best way of responding.
Ogg produces great-sounding voice files.
Anyone know of a recording application? I'm having trouble finding one that is suitable. A Windows version will work; I'd like a Linux recorder also.
Bush's education improvements were
Try Debian, or the FSF.
Are you sure that you're using an up to date version of Oggenc? I know that my old version (beta1, IIRC) was painfully slow, but that a newer one (beta4) was about as fast as lame (about 2.5x on my PIII 500) and produces good sound quality at 128 kbit/s. This is confirmed by what they say on theirweb site. They made substantial progress with beta4 and strongly reccomend that you upgrade if you're using anything older than that.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
The only difference was that the low end was less impressive on the OGG than the CD. I put on a few songs and started them simultanously and switched the amp from CD to cassette in (which happened to be my computer). Although it is possible that the casette input amp is less accurate near the low end than the CD input amp, I doubt it. The speakers used were Bose 501s. Conclusion: at 256k/sec, OGG was fine at the high end, but strangely enough, not good enough at the low end.
You are comaring:
a) OGG -- decoded stream -- soundcard -- casette input -- amp -- speakers
b) CD -- decoded stream -- CD-D/A-converter -- CD-input -- amp -- speakers
If alternative a doesn't sound as good as b, this doesn't say anything about the ogg-encoding, because it isn't the only variable. Maybe the difference is caused by the different audio-characteristics of soundcard and CD-D/A-converter.
To get a valid comparison, rip the content of the CD as WAV. Then compare the WAV and the OGG, using the same soundcard and the same amp-input. Everything else is totally meaningless.
But even with this setting, there remains one additional variable: your psyche. If ogg and wav were bit-per-bit equal you will still recognize a difference when you know which one of the two you are hearing. So if you want to get meaningful results, you have to make a double-blind-test.
It's really sad how easy it is for the marketing guys to convince people that alternative codecs are inferior, because 95% don't understand anything about scientific methods or statistics. And they will do that, because they have the budget and we have not.
You should try to eliminate the question of wether the casette input amp is the problem, Just put the CD into your computer and play it. Not perfect (since you can't switch between your stereo playing CDs or your computer, unless you hvae 2 of the same cd). But it might show a problem with the tape inputs. (It is possible, as they may have tailored them unintentially to the tapes limits of dynamic range.)
You don't sound like a troll, so I'll keep going.
.gif graphics format being the most famous example). Again, ogg is the only tool in its class that protects you from this.
The political goals of Ogg are to provide a free, high quality digital music compression tool. There are no other encoders in the world that are free. When I say free I'm talking about the "free as in speech" cliche that protects you from company X suddenly deciding to extort money from a market via patent and copyright enforcement once it attains a sufficient size. This happens all the time (the
It is an important thing that people be able to space-shift audio, especially audio that they already own. Being able to do this gives you, the user, control and flexibility to listen to your media as you see fit. Space-shifting is a a fair-use right that has been upheld by the Supreme Court. Space shifting has numerous legitimate uses that far outweigh the "piracy angle".
Again, Ogg is the only tool in its class that legally *guarantees* the user the ability to space-shift audio into the future. You can be sure that corporate interests, even as we speak, are using technology to control how we use media to increase their profits. They would like to prevent, or charge money for the "priviledge" of space-shifting. Once again, Ogg is the only tool in its class that protects you from this kind of extortion.
Most people do care about this, but are too lazy to do anything about it, even something so small as re-encoding their music in the Ogg format to show others that they will not willingly set themselves up for space-shifting extortion. Other people are too shortsighted to see that something as small as a music format *will* effect the amount of control they have over media in the future. A few people aren't lazy or shortsighted- they simple don't care, usually because they are unaccostumed to caring about anything that affects someone outside their immediate family.
So no, I strongly disagree that use of Ogg, even in the face of technically better alternatives is bullshit politics. I think it's very important. I also think that Ogg is a technically superior product than mp3 encoders. As time goes on, the difference will grow even more.
I don't consider myself a zealot, simply an informed consumer with an understanding of history and the ability to extrapolate into the future.
There's a huge infrastructure set up around MP3s. The most obvious thing for me (and probably tons of other Windows-based MP3 users) is the ID3-tag on most MP3s. I rely heavily on this for indexing my huge collection of MP3s, and I have about 3-4 software programs that use it, and without which I'd be back in the dark ages. One is an extension to the windows shell that adds a page to the properties for MP3s, where I can edit the ID3 tag. It also provides different icons depending on the bitrates of the files.
There's also MPTagger which lets me easily rename files any way I want based on the ID3 tags, or set ID3 tags based on the filenames.
And most importantly, there's my "MP3 Collection" database, which indexes all my MP3s by the ID3 tags.
when all that stuff supports Ogg, then it will be reasonable for me to use, but without it, it's a format that I admire, but it's like giving me a new car with excellent gas milage, but no windows, weak breaks, horrible steering, and hard, bumpy seats. I'd admire the engine, but wish it were a lot more user-friendly...
His beta 4 files will continue to work forever... Nothing about this release makes old files incompatable.
:-)
...Or shall I just stop improving things at this point?
Monty
Because when I sit down next week and beging ripping and encoding 500 CDs, I want a proven technology, not a set of algorithms that will change perisodically, laughing in my face that I should have waited and I wouldn't have that popping noise in the background. Fraunhofer mp3enc (circa-1998) hasn't had any problems in 3 years, and when I'm going to spend a month of my life encoding music, I sure as hell ain't going to set myself up to redo it when ogg v2.1 comes out and they finally get it to sound perfect. I shouldn't even need to mention the prevalence of mp3-capable portable devices :P
You dont have to junk your mp3 collection. ogg files may someday become the format of choice, but I doubt that music players, including portable players, will stop supporting the mp3 format. Instead, you will have a lot of "old" songs in mp3 format, and your "new" songs will be encoded in the ogg format. You will be able to listen to both. Napster became the phenomenon it was because it was free and had a huge amount of content. If using mp3 files begins to cost money, the pressure will be on for a movement to ogg files.
Remember, lawyers don't sue people, people sue people
Did you perform a blind test (Meaning you did not know which version you were listening to) when you were listening?
I think it would be a good idea for a research project: ask 100 people to listen to different encoders, Ogg, Wma, Lame,etc, and ask them which sounds better. If we do that then we might have some scientific data so support the claim that Ogg is technically superior.
You own a patent, you get the tech. to become widely accepted then you crack down by sending nasty letters to everyone.
Don't think it could happen. Humm, the DMCA is a law created to make sure it does. Corporate interests are suddenly creating the future, not the acedemics and scientists. No, like Professor Felten, they are threatened.
So, support Ogg, GNU and everyone else who is protecting your Freedom. There is a larger purpose to their work which most people are just discovering.
Freedom you say? Yes, Freedom, look at Dmitry Sklyarov -- he sat in jail...
Pay-per-view books?
http://www.anti-dmca.org
That's lower bitrates for a given level of quality. Duh.
Patrick Doyle
I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
That's what Bzip2 is for.
That's actually the Xiph fishy. The Ogg Vorbis logo is this one.
You know, in the midst of all the discussions about whether or not the name is cool, or whether or not it's better than MP3, I think there's one thing that needs to be said a little more...
Thank you.
I think the whole Ogg Vorbis team deserves a big round of applause for working hard to turn out a really super audio compression system and making it free.
My one question is: how can we help out?
Ogg is as good, if not better technically. The political motivation is *not* bullshit.
For me, the issues at stake are just a bit more important than my existing mp3 collection. It's sad that so many people are so lazy and shortsighted.
Two words: peer pressure. When enough cool people start using Ogg Vorbis, people will surely switch over. We just need to get celebrity endorsements. ;)
Not to mention Ogg Vorbis being an open standard, royalty and propriety free, as compared to the costly MP3 technology. If I were a hardware vendor making portable audio technology, I would save a couple of dollars using Ogg Vorbis and slap together an easy program to create all the Ogg Vorbis files the user wants. No huss, no fuss.
...and that's why Mr. President, I would switch over from MP3 to Ogg Vorbis.
Speaking of which, it seems everyone is assuming it's either one way or the other. But my music collection is dynamic in the fact that I have both MP3 and Ogg Vorbis audio files. Most portable audio players don't support this "crazy" combination. All my software players do. I'm quite content downloading MP3s from MP3.com and ripping my personal audio collection to Ogg Vorbis. =)
The proof is in the pudding. I hate pudding...
The ONLY reason why I don't use Ogg:
There's still NO decent m68k CODEC for Ogg, while there ARE great m68k mp3 CODECs...
'nuff said...
Smaller files because of lower bitrates possible.
Same or better quality for those smaller files.
Many (unfortunately, not all) of the better MP3 players (Such as the EMPEG player) are totally firmware upgradable and they've already implemented versions of Ogg Vorbis players or are in the process of doing so...
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
All those MP3 files aren't going to disappear of course but as Ogg Vorbis is free software (licensed under the BSD license) a lot of players are going to build in support for it, preparing it to replace MP3 in the long term (internet time, I suppose).
Monkey sense
Do you have that new song by...
Sure, I got the MP3!
In my opinion it will take a while before people wil want to make the change. Not all people care for patent free formats and free software.
Not all people know about GNU, Linux, Ogg Vorbis, etc... either! Most people don't even know Netscape: Windows gets you on the net. Windows plays your MP3's, Windows...
my $0.02
StarTrek.org Free Webmail
I just did this test.. Ogg vs. LAME at 128, 160, 192, and 256kbps. Ogg sounds better to me at every bitrate. I won't know for sure until I get home to better equipment.. Are you sure you're using RC2?
Well, there are any number of reasons which would be best researched on oggvorbis' website/FAQ, but your point seems to be that "people" need to use Ogg in order for it to "win out". This is a silly and narrowminded premise that valorizes dominance and...monopolies.
There is no need for there to be one encoding format any more than there needs to be only one OS. Choice is something that can be preserved by supporting alternative formats (even if they're of better quality ;). This support can come in many forms, and the most effective forms of support that I can think of are availability and usability.
People who are tech-friendly and willing to be early adopters are in a crucial position to get set up for encoding Ogg, dealing with plugins, etc. This is important because it *makes .ogg files available". There won't be any reason to listen to .ogg files if there aren't any to listen to. "People" aren't going to be able to listen to these .ogg files if it's too complicated to go get a plugin or set up MIME types or something, so player support is important to make it easy for Joe Random Lamer to listen. Keep in mind that JRL has no concept of file formats. If there's a file that his default player (thinking "Windows") doesn't play, they'll just go on to something else. If the player supports .ogg (among others), then the person can listen to a file without having to deal with the complications. .ogg not being ubiquitous. Same here. But the problem of .ogg becoming a prevalent format is easy to solve: start making .ogg files! Nobody has to "switch" to .ogg except for people doing the encoding, which is just as easy in *nix as in Windows as it is for MP3's. If you think MP3 is a better-sounding or faster or whatever format than .ogg, then that's fine. But what are you going to do as the major companies start clamping down on MP3 in favor of DRM formats? Certainly none of this matters to someone who encodes CDs (or whatever) they bought and are not going to be trading MP3s, but every time these files trade hands or are posted for public consumption it's an opportunity to let someone know there are other (better sounding ;) choices out there. It's time for people to stop allowing themselves to be scandalized by the MP3 hysteria and just move on. Ideological? Sure, in the sense that maintaining a range of choice is an ideal.
So, on the face of it you've got a problem with
When I was a kid, we only had one Darth.
Is this:
Will I be able to tell the difference from playing my Sarah McLachlan CDs on my in-car stereo?
and
Will my techno and other rave-type music sound and feel the same when I play it on my computer, given that it's using the slightly better than average speakers I bought with it?
Everything else is just fluff, like when CDs came out and purists complained about distortions and hearing audience noise.
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
(DCMA?)
That's DMCA.
(Digital Millennium Copyright Act)
deus does not exist but if he does
What exactly do you mean by "proven technology"? New software build on old technology (like in the science sense), that has been proved to be working. This is exactly like what Ogg Vorbis does, but without building it on top of patented science, which is a very Good Thing.
What you should do is to compare the codecs with your own ears, not just sit and look at how old the technology you use is.
I'm sure you did this, but both encodings came from the same WAV file? I have to wonder if comparisons are being done using different rippers, resulting in slightly different source files. After all, it's the ripping process, not the encoding process that is likely to reproduce the noise from the disc, no? Isn't that why cdparanoia is "paranoid" and has extra "paranoia" available?
I do not have a signature
You sound like you have very discerning hearing (unlike me -- too much standing near the front at discos and concerts :-). Why don't you find a section of the music which Vorbis encodes badly, and tell the developers about it? This isn't the final release, just a tuning release, and they're always pathetically grateful to find people who can find cases where the encoder fails *and explain what sounds wrong*.
There are quite a few cropping up in the #vorbis IRC channel as we speak.
-- Help Digitise the Public Domain at DP.
I ran across that story after a 36 hour sleepless (well, ok, a :20 nap) hacking session pushing out rc2. Gah. Nasty.
I was kinda surprised that it was Ogg that drove away my wife (here I thought it was my awful personality. What a relief),that I've been habitually unemployed, destitute, and that I don't even own a proper desk. Ah-heh.
Unfortunately, the green shag carpeting part is completely true. Damn you, the 1970's! Will you never die?!
Monty
(Oh well, at least it seemed to be positive on Ogg)
I've known a few other places to use PNG (my current employer's CBT system uses it extensively) and I'm sure it's because of it's "free" nature.
OGG will eventually become the same thing. It's not marketing-sexy as MP3, but I'm sure when game manufacturers investigate and need a good format, they will start to prefer and "unencumbered" format like OGG.
Quick follow-up: I've gotten RC2 and with a couple quick, preliminary tests, the quality is at least the same as b4, if not better (putting it far ahead of mp3), and the encoding speed is the same (55 seconds to encode a 3:01 .wav on my Duron 850). Ogg Vorbis has definitely been worth the wait, considering there are even further improvements to be made.
Tell your nephew he typed way more than he should have.
Dmitry is a russian, but currently he can't leave Northern California. He's on bail. A $50,000 bond portrays him as a bad-ass criminal. Obviously, doing his job was a bad excuse. They didn't arrest his boss though.
- Steeltoe
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
You made a small mistake. XP's MP3 encoder does only work up to some small bitrate. But MS doesn't want you to put up with bad sounding MP3's. They want you to switch over to WMA8 which isn't encumbered with bitrate limits and allows you to make better sounding music files. This of course has the effect of locking you into using MS's software. Is there a player for WMA for Linux?
The code quality is horrible, but that might not matter.
-Dan
These are phantom advantages. Oggs are just as easy to use and just as easy to create from CDs. If, on your particular platform/OS, you are experiencing a difference, it has nothing to do with the qualities of the file format and encoder, and everything to do with whatever particular applications that you have chosen to run.
The only serious advantage MP3 has right now, is that hardware Ogg players aren't on the market yet.
Once that advantage goes away (and it will), there won't be any significant reasons to use one format over the other, except for performance/quality reasons. And if it ever comes down to that, then Ogg will rip MP3's head off.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
www.xiph.org
I don't know what you've done, but Oggenc should run at 4x _at least_ on your system.
The 128kbps mode is not ideally tuned (IMHO), but the problems are known. 160kbps is already a lot better.
--
GCP
Free Mac Mini
Because the whole point of OGG was to create a patent-free audio compression format.
I'd love to use Ogg Vorbis and be a good little Free Software guy, but I tried using it this morning and was disappointed.
I compared an Ogg (uning the encoder that came out today) file with a 128KB/s mp3 and a medium quality VBR mp3 (both made with Lame) and I just didn't think the Ogg file was quite there. I was using the same file for all of the tests (Mahler's 9th Symphony).
Also, on my Athlon 900 Oggenc went at 0.6x encoding speed. I usually get 5-8x with 128KB/s mp3s.
I ended up settling on going a little bigger and using a 192KB/s MP3, which I'd say is still the best option.
Best wishes to the Ogg Vorbis team. I hope that I can eventually ditch my mp3s.
Channel coupling is a method of decreasing the bitrate while maintaining identical or similar quality. Vorbis supports multiple modes, from a "lossless stereo" to aggressive modes. The lossless mode produces greater compression with bit-for-bit identical output results to non-coupled modes. The more aggresive modes sacrifice some of the stereo separation in order to decrease the bitrate.
So, your question is a little silly. The whole point to having multiple bitrates is to allow the user to choose their preferred mix of quality and size. If an aggressive channel-coupling mode can provide significant size savings while having a minimal impact on quality, lots of people will find that worthwhile. And, as you would know if you read the link before posting, you don't have to sacrifice quality at all! Do you really need to ask why someone might want to encode in a mode which has a lower bitrate and identical quality?
"Monkey's Audio is a fine program. It's by far the best lossless compressor today. The only problem is that it is Windows only and nonfree."
Features:
* Fast ? significantly faster than competing lossless compressors
(can process most albums in under 3 minutes on a 500 Celeron)
* Great compression ? gets the best lossless compression available in 'extra high' mode
* Perfect sound ? absolutely no quality loss, meaning it sounds perfect and decompresses perfect (it's lossless!)
* Winamp? and Media Jukebox? support ? plays (with seeking) in both Winamp? and Media Jukebox?
* Easy ? the Windows environment interface is both powerful and easy to use
* Free ? Monkey?s Audio is completely free!
* Error proof ? Monkey?s Audio incorporates CRC?s to ensure proper decompression of data (errors never go unnoticed)
* Tagging support ? Monkey?s Audio fully supports the popular ID3 tags used on MP3?s, so existing software can manage and catalogue your Monkey?s Audio collection.
* External coder support - you can use Monkey's Audio as a front-end for all of your encoding needs
They claim it's free.
"We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
in rc 2, the hardwired stereo models are:
up to 96kbps lossless stereo to 4/6kHz (depending on block), point/6phase/lossless stereo above that
128 lossless stereo to 4/6kHz, 6phase/lossless to 11kHz, point/6phase/lossless stereo above
160 lossless stereo to 4/6kHz, 8phase/lossless to 11kHz, point/8phase/6phase/lossless above
192 lossless stereo to 4/6kHz, 8 phase/lossless above
256+ lossless coupling
The trigger between different stereo models is currently amplitude based (how far the spectral energy is from the noise floor). The trigger threshholds are also increasingly conservative as bitrate increases.
Monty
Well, there is a difference between file formats and codecs.
Right now, there is a Vorbis file format (the only format that uses the Vorbis codec) and an MP3 file format (the only file format that uses the MP3 codec).
Why use the MP3 file format for Vorbis-encoded files? They still won't play with an mp3 decoder. And they won't play with any existing Vorbis decoders either.
My point is, there really isn't any point to making it in the mp3 file format as opposed to its existing one.
1. Ogg Vorbis can encode smaller files with better audio quality.
2. Many online music sites (for instance, ElectronicScene.com) will enable support for the Ogg Vorbis format because it is less storage strain on their servers.
3. I like it better. I use it all the time and I could care less about mp3 now.
OK, that's about all I have.
"Upgrade your grey matter, 'cause one day it may matter." --Deltron Zero
"To get a valid comparison, rip the content of the CD as WAV. Then compare the WAV and the OGG, using the same soundcard and the same amp-input. Everything else is totally meaningless."
How 'bout this: rip the CD as WAV, Ogg and De-Ogg to WAV. Then write a couple of CDRs with all songs in the same order as the CD, but with some songs from the original WAV, and others the Ogged&De-Ogged WAV. Then do a blind classification trying to see if ou can tell if it's the original WAV or not by listening to the CDRs. If you are correct 50% of the time, then for you Ogg is lossless for your ears.
In my opinion that's the only way to really test. The lower quality of the soundcard output might hide differences in your suggestion. Plus the blind classification removes any psychological effects of expecting to hear differences or not.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
...cause he's am ant, see?
MP3 has mind-share with the public
MP3 has a huge installed base of players and devices
Users have no reason to stop using MP3
Unless Ogg Vorbis can demonstrate massive storage space savings/technical advantages or MP3 is made completely unusable, users have no reason to switch, and users aren't going to switch without a reason. It's new, it's nifty, it's innovative, it's interesting to us, but like many other open-source initiatives, until it gives Average Computer User a real reason to change their habits, it's just an intresting niche.
Seen any BadMarketing lately?
I'm not sure it'll actually work, but a few benefits come to mind:
1) They take up less space than MP3's, matching one of Window's Media "selling" points(for personal use, at least).
2) Since there is no need to pay anyone to support this (as their is with mp3), it could be seen as a viable alternative to both mp3 and WM.
Then again, if the record industry keeps on killing fair use by polluting CDs, none of this will matter.
I'll start using that audio format once it gets a name that isn't so stupid. I know this is a trivial thing, but I don't use mp3's much anyway... but I'de really only use it if I can swap them w/my non-technical friends and they won't use it because of the name... argh
The best thing is how it just rolls off the tongue...
/.'d, so if you've seen it all before and want to get directly to the downloads...(but I encourage browsing the whole downloads area)
Vorbis...
The site is kind of slow (as it is being
Unix/Linux (RC2)
Win (RC2)
Unix/Linux (RC2)
Macintosh
BeOS
My sigs always suck.
Better quality at a smaller filesize.
Vorbis is very interesting for hardware manufacturers because of the lack of licensing fees and patents. Although support it not that good at the moment, there have been companies that expressily said Vorbis support would be preferred over mp3pro. Some are waiting for 1.0, some already have unofficial support.
WinAmp will support Vorbis by default in the next release. Why _not_ make the move? Unless you have a non-upgradable portable, there's only good points to it.
--
GCP
%define name libao
b z2
./autogen.sh --prefix=/usr
./configure --prefix=/usr
%define version 0.8.0
%define release 1
Summary: Cross Platform Audio Output Library
Name: %{name}
Version: %{version}
Release: %{release}
Group: Libraries/Multimedia
Copyright: GPL
URL: http://www.xiph.org/
Vendor: Xiphophorus
Source: ftp://ftp.xiph.org/pub/ao/%{name}-%{version}.tar.
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-root
Requires: esound >= 0.2.8
%description
Libao is a cross platform audio output library. It currently supports
ESD, OSS, Solaris, and IRIX.
%package devel
Summary: Cross Platform Audio Output Library Development
Group: Development/Libraries
%description devel
The libao-devel package contains the header files and documentation
needed to develop applications with libao.
%prep
%setup -q -n %{name}-%{version}
%build
if [ ! -f configure ]; then
CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS"
else
CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS"
fi
make
%install
[ "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" != "/" ] && rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
make DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT install
%files
%defattr(-,root,root)
%doc AUTHORS
%doc CHANGES
%doc COPYING
%doc README
/usr/lib/libao.so.*
/usr/lib/ao/*.so
%files devel
%doc doc/*.html
/usr/include/ao/ao.h
/usr/include/ao/os_types.h
/usr/lib/libao.so
/usr/share/aclocal/ao.m4
%clean
[ "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" != "/" ] && rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%post
/sbin/ldconfig
%postun
/sbin/ldconfig
%changelog
* Tue Aug 14 2001 Anonymous Coward
- devel docs are now all HTML
- for better compression use bz2, recompress the source as bzip2 if you like
* Sun Sep 03 2000 Jack Moffitt
- initial spec file created
From the paper on coupled-channel encoding:
"Eliminating Trigonometry and Rounding"
Man, I wish they had thought of that sooner - That would have my Pre-Calc grade soooo much.
Friends don't let friends misuse the subjunctive.
I would recommend the widely-used Shorten format. There are encoding tools for both Windows and Linux and plugins for both WinAmp and XMMS. Compression is usually around 50%.
If you want more information, a good place to look is etree.org.
Ogg Vorbis is an open standard. I like open standards. Now sing with me, or just download the Ogg Vorbis file:
Join us now and share the software...
I know I need to post this to the authors, but... It is my goal to replace my wife's and my CD collection of 400-500 discs with a hard drive. We'd like to be able to put the CDs in a closet and reclaim some living room space. So, I ripped 10 or so titles and compared them to the original. The rip quality was 256kb/sec. I'm not exactly an audiophile, but I won't tolerate noise, so maybe a lossy compression isn't right for me. I didn't notice any high end problems or artifacts like MP3. Stereo seperation was excellent. The only difference was that the low end was less impressive on the OGG than the CD. I put on a few songs and started them simultanously and switched the amp from CD to cassette in (which happened to be my computer). Although it is possible that the casette input amp is less accurate near the low end than the CD input amp, I doubt it. The speakers used were Bose 501s. Conclusion: at 256k/sec, OGG was fine at the high end, but strangely enough, not good enough at the low end. If the low end can be clarified / amplified (hard to tell, psychoacoustics are strange), I'll be OGGing away for a good long time.
"patent free" as in "speech free", or as in "beer free"?
techno music sounds great with ogg. you will not be able to tell the difference between your ogg file and the actual cd.
Yeah, but I thought the article said something about distortion in the lower ranges. Good techno vibrates through your body, and if done right, you can feel it ascend up the scale as it changes frequency.
One way to test it is to use deaf people - they hear music from the vibrations, so they could do quality checks on how it "sounds" in terms of vibration.
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
it's really no big deal if most players will support the format... You can just have mp3's and ogg's or whatever you call them in a single playlist and play them with one player; np
Actually, the libraries are BSD-licensed so companies will be more likely to adopt it.
from what i've heard it makes a dummy file and just opens a hidden .wav
Photos.
What about Vorbis-in-AVI, Vorbis-over-RTP, etc.? If it's just called "Ogg", then most people won't know that the compression format they get in .ogg files is the same as the one they get when they see "DivX video, Vorbis audio" in Microsoft Patented AVI Player for Windows.
Why would you want lower bitrates? for a worse sounding ogg??
Free Mac Mini
So, why is this article listed under the "patents pending" topic again?
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
I understand the philosophical arguments for using an open source standard instead of MP3s, but I have a hard time imagining that Ogg Vorbis will win out. MP3s are easy to use, easy to create (from existing CDs, at least), etc. I don't see the big motivating factor for people to go to Ogg Vorbis. The future seems to be divided up between MP3 and copy-protected formats provided by companies like Microsoft.
What am I missing? What is going to motivate anyone but idealogically motivated open source advocates to switch to Ogg Vorbis?
** The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not reflect those of my employers - past, present, or future**
Yeah, we definitely more than 2 channels, for those of us that have more than 2 ears. ;)
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
I don't know about other players, but there is a plugin for Winamp called Gapless. Absolutely a must if you've set Winamp to handle your audio CDs (in addition to your scenario).
I've noticed most of the posts here are saying how awful Vorbis sounds... I've been using it for quite a while now, and have done pretty extensive testing myself as well as reading what alot of other people have had to say. I don't have "Golden Ears" or $10k worth of stereo equipment, just a decent pair of headphones, but it's ALWAYS been my opinion that ogg sounds better than mp3. I sent one to a friend once, and his first reaction was, "WOW! This is ALOT better than mp3!". And that was with the beta 4 encoder. Even those crazy guys over on the r3mix.net forums have lots of praise for Ogg Vorbis.
Like the topic says, I haven't been able to get to RC2 yet, thanks to it being slashdotted, but I seriously doubt RC2 sounds worse than beta 4, and while encode times _are_ slower than mp3, they're nowhere near as slow as some people are saying. (I get about 3x speed on my Duron 850 with b4). Clicks and pops are likely a cause of a bad rip from the CD, not the encoder.
I've been using nothing but Ogg for my CDs for a while now, and have encouraged many friends to do the same. People really need to give Ogg a fair, unbiased try before they go saying it sucks, because it's most definitely at the very least, better than mp3 at the same bitrate. Check out PCABX for info on how to do a good double-blind listening test.
Congrats to Monty and the rest of the Ogg Vorbis team. Keep up the good work.
Um, well, I think the name is dorky, now that you ask, but that could be a plus.
If, in fact, ogg proves to be simpler than MP3, than having it called ogg is ok.
Will the next improved version be called Tarzan?
--- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
With RC2 just being out, this was rather hard to do. Also, the encoder is not fully tuned, so waiting for 1.0 final would be advisable.
Another factor is the bitrate. The ordering of codecs @ 64 kbps can be totally different than that @ 160kbps.
--
GCP
All my mod points are gone :-/
I'll wait patiently. <G>
* As is generally the case, my opinions do not reflect those of my employer.
Despite having their funding cave almost all the way in, the good folks at Xiphonious have gone ahead and pounded out the format that will kill Mpeg-based audio. It will be the most decisive victory of Open Source Software over propriety formats, even moreso than the Linux/Windows competition.
While this is strictly my opinion, these are the reasons I beleive this:
1. Xiph has spent a great deal of time on the niceties of the format. As much, or moreso than the format itself. They've made sure that anyone can encode high-quality OGGs with both a command line and a 'droplet' style encoder. They've also made sure that anyone can play oggs with plugins for all the most popular MP3 players. Their player libraries are all LGPL'd, making it so that anyone else can include OGG functionality in plugin-style to their application.
2. Because of the LGPL'd libraries, developers and publishers can use OGG format audio for free, rather than paying a patent-fee to the Fraunhoeffer institue. This is a pretty major thing, since it deducts five dollars from the cost of any given software distribution. Not a lot for a single game, but think of the money that a popular company like Verant would save by distributing their next game with an Ogg-based soundtrack. Ogg translates directly to monetary savings!
3. MP3 is compatiable with Stereo CD streams. That's great, but you really can't encode Dolby 5.1 audio without sacrificing quality. Ogg can do 255 channels, making it 'Dolby 5.1' ready. DVD Audio ain't gonna stay copy-protected for long, and when it's protection goes, you can be sure that the people encoding it will use Ogg instead of mp3 so that there is no quality loss.
4. MP3 is a dirty word if you work for an RIAA company. There are now dozens of firms who work to track down file-traders on P2P networks, IRC, Websites, and FTP sites. They aren't searching for Ogg's yet. As it becomes more and more difficult to trade MP3's, people will turn to Ogg like people who used Napster turned to Bearshear and other Gnutella clients.
5. Ogg offers significant quality improvements over MP3. Windows Media offers these same kind of improvements, but they come at the cost of restrictive Microsoft policy such as limited bit rates and 'digital rights management' schemes. Since Ogg format doesn't even contain hooks for digital rights, I think I know where the majority of Audiophiles are going to be looking for their online audio fixes.
6. The Vorbig Fishy ROCKS!
Like I said, just my opinions...
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
Yes: http://www.doom9.org/Soft21/Files/Audio/Codecs-0.0 .5.msi
That's all well and good, but I've already ripped/encoded/downloaded/burned around 90 gigs of 160/192 mp3's, and many friends of mine have mp3 collections ranging from 5-100 gigs. Why would we want to let all that time and effort go to waste just to take advantage of differences that will mainly appeal to audiophiles, and not casual listeners looking for free music? But I suppose I should just stop downloading MP3's and toss my 135 odd MP3 cds in the trash because OGG would let me choose how stereo coupling is done!
I also know a lot of people who own portable MP3 players and built car MP3 players. I guess they would be ready and willing to return their $200 MP3 players and take apart those silly car rigs they spent so much money and effort on, because, after all, OGG lets you strip away parts of the files to make lower bitrate streams - without re-coding!
And I'm sure as a serious music connoisseur you would know about all the big mp3 groups that operate on IRC. I guess you should go tell EGO and KSI that they can have more than 2 audio channels with OGG (GASP!) and they will see the error of their ways and delete all their old MP3 release archives, disband, and reform as OGG distributors!
And let's not forget how much of a phenomena MP3 has become. Napster became an international celebrity, every major entertainment company has hopped on the MP3 bandwagon, and the general public has embraced MP3. But they obviously would be willing to abandon their MP3 obsession if they knew OGG was open sourced! (Oh wait, the average person doesn't know or care at all that MP3 is officially a proprietary format).
Maybe OGG has some minor quality differences that might make it sound a little better than MP3 in general. Maybe I would tell if I were actually able to find a reasonable selection of OGG or if I actually cared enough to make some myself, which I don't. After all , I already have my 90 gigs of MP3's, and I can find good quality MP3's of any song I want readily. Why would anyone want to start from scratch when they can already get everything they want without any trouble? MP3 is here to stay. Nobody knows the name "OGG," and if they did, they'd probably just ask, "What the hell kind of dumbass name is that?"
Like most Slashdot arguments, OGG makes sense from a technical standpoint, but fails to have any practicality whatsoever.
I'm trying to set up a semi-blind comparison (people can cheat if sufficiently motivated) at 128 kbit/s. This is to compare Vorbis RC2, Lame mp3, Liquifier 5 AAC, MPC, and WMA8. Xing mp3 will be used as a low-end anchor to keep the comparisons in perspective. I will probably start slowly with one test run this week. See this thread on the r3mix forum:
Soliciting suggestions for a series of 128 tests
I might have believed your statements about quality if it wern't for the blatent lie about speed.
Dont' get me wrong, I love the .ogg format and
have encoded quite a few of my CDs with it. But
I wonder about it's success. Most of the people
(non-techical people,aside from using a web browser and downloading mp3s)I have talked to about it cannot get over the dorky name, "Ogg Vorbis". This is a problem with alot of open-source projects. They may be superior to commercial alternatives but are not geared(or marketed) towards the average joe. I know why the name was chosen. I just think its a stupid name
for a format that is "supposed" to replace MP3.
Encode MP3s, RC2-OGGs, and whatever else you like, at all the bitrates you are interested in. I recommend doing this for many different types of music you like.
IMPORTANT STEP 1:
Once they're on your computer, decompress them back into a .WAV file. Make sure you keep track of which .wav came from which compressed file. If you tested both MP3 and OGG at 3 different bitrates each, you will have 6 .WAV files for each song, plus the original .WAV (don't delete it). Then cut out relevant passages from each of the songs, maybe a minute each, with a wav editor.
IMPORTANT STEP 2:
Once you have these wav files on your hard drive, tell your roommate to burn them on a CD, in an order that he will write down but not reveal to you. Then put the CD into your stereo and get a good paid of headphones. Crank it up, and take notes on which versions of the passages sound the best and why. See how successful you are in identifying the original wav file when you don't know which it is. See if there is any pattern to your responses.
Until you do a double-blind test like this (come on, it's not difficult) you really shouldn't be shooting your mouth off about which format sounds better.
Well, damnit, that link just didn't work did it? ;)
Alcohol mocks me yet again!
Yes... preview is overrated.
So-far, I've encoded about 120 CDs (just over 1,200 tracks) into 14GB of disk using the 350Kbit mode of the encoder (disk is cheap, and I hate bad sounding audio).
For playback I use a SB Live board in a Celeron 700 machine. On the SB Live, you can get a digital out board for like $60 that has a couple of S/PDIF outputs. From there, I pump the signal into a Rotel RSP-985 pre-amp (because the D/A converter there is way better than the D/A on the SoundBlaster) and drive B&W 604 series 2 speakers with a Rotel 5-channel amp. I cannot tell the difference at all between CD and the Ogg files. Even using a pair of Sennheizer 600 headphones (which, if you don't know headphones, sound amazing) I can't tell the difference.
Bottom line for me is that the files sound fantastic, and I don't have to support an annoying patent-encumbered format like MP3.
Great job, guys! I can't wait to play with RC2!
Have there been any actual scientific comparisons of sound quality between MP3/Ogg/WMA/etc formats? So far I've only heard conflicting user reports. ("WMA is better and smaller", "Ogg is better and smaller", "You can't beat MP3", etc.) By scientific, I mean a study with multiple listeners that is at least single blind, where the listeners don't know which sample is which format.
you can't yet (it's not a simple switch, it affects the entropy model to use). I *will* make user-specification of stereo model possible as soon as possible.
Monty
I've been looking through all the docs and --help output, but I don't see anything that tells one how to specify the type of channel coupling to use in oggenc. Any pointers?
UniSys, GIF, Patent
Nice neat compression algorithm. Lossless. People liked it. Poularity hit critical mass. Lawsuit was filed. Now you can't create a GIF unless you license the tech. Think about that next time you imagine MP3 sounds all that much better. Do you really want ogg to be at PNG-status when the lawsuit is filed? Let's hope not.
Hope this isn't redundant, as I haven't followed this issue that closely. Then again, it seems like it doesn't sink in until repetition 367 or so around here some times.
not 'equal' to, 'favorably comparable' to. Besides if I was one of those coders, I'd do this just for the coolness factor of being able to say I created my own unique type of compression.
--Jubedgy
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis hebes
...to convert all your MP3s to OGG like my nephew did, out comes something else. He spent weeks converting those puppies with command line converters. I think I feel bad for him. Oh well. When Vorbis adopts a standard, I'll switch. Till then, though, I'll watch the "Nephew Follies" and leech info off of his adventures.
Blog Prophyts - Right On, Man
In most cases, a 60kbps OGG file sounds as good as an 128k mp3. An 80k OGG is as good as 160k mp3 and half the size.
If you are serving audio streams, you can actually strip away parts of the files to make lower bitrate streams--without re-coding. (wow!) MP3 can't.
You can have more than 2 audio channels. MP3 can't.
The comment fields are well defined and you can have whatever attributes you want, with strings as long as necessary. ID3 for mp3s is a hack; string lengths are limited and you can't add easily add your own fields.
If you have a portable player, you would appreciate the smaller size with high quality.
In the future, you can select how you want stereo coupling done (not in this release). (Mp3 can.)
If you make computer games, you have a high quality free way of adding a lot of music to your games. (possibly patents for mp3)
You can do 44.1khz and 48 khz audio.
You can concatenate multiple streams together to make one file, and it will play correctly. You can also cut portions out and paste them together without re-encoding.
Ogg's are exactly the same length as the original WAVs--something MP3 lacks--so that when you make recordings of live shows, gaps don't appear in you r audio.
The encoder sounds good by default, so music traded on file sharing systems sounds good (unlike all those terrible 128k mp3s encoded by anything that isn't LAME).
Got friends?
too late too little.......the creators of .ogg should put there energy into other projects.....i cant believe in the year 2001 were wanting too go backward in audio quality technology.....it doesnt exite me too hear about yet another audio codec that producess lossy audio files.....you know the project cant go very far when they set there goals from the beggining to create an audio codec that is "equal" to mp3s......im sure these guys are very intelligent coders and really wanna put there mark on the net....unfortunetly this wont do it.....
"hey man..how fast are we goin?" -cheech "i think were parked" -chong
Ever heard of firmware updates?
Many of those "expensive" players can be updated for Vorbis support- in fact, some of the manufacturers of those players have been playing with versions of their product firmware that DOES play Ogg files. And they don't have to pay royalties to the people who own the rights to MP3 with this one. The average person wins because they're mostly ripping their own stuff to be able to play it in jukeboxes, etc.- this is a definite improvement (How about double or more the capacity of that dinky walkman or that MP3 car player- without anything other than re-ripping the content.
But then, if you've got 90 gigs of stuff, you're not the average person- you're a trader. If Oggs take over, then your entire hoarded cache of data becomes worthless and you've got to start over.
Just because you can't see the advantage, doesn't mean there isn't one. Just because you have a problem doesn't mean that everyone else is going to have one as well.
I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
Does Nick's QT component use Altivec?
There's a shocking difference in CPU loading between altivec and non-altivec versions of MP3 decoders, (like, 30% versus 4% CPU usage IIRC) and I wonder how much Vorbis would benefit from the array processor.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Having erased my entire collection multiple times (read, too much free time), I finally decided on <A HREF="http://www.mpegplus.org">mpegplus</A&g t;. True, there are some licensing isssues with the encoder (still free right now), the quality does appear to be noticeably better (having compared 256kb ogg with '-insane' mpegplus - in fact, it appears better to my untrained ears than lame - though I no doubt subscribe to the inherent external placebo effect of reading mostly-unverified-external great reviews :) ). Unfortuntely, I'm left with incompatibilities abound (well, everything works fine other than the Audio Request I have - alas, I suspect I will be bound to making secondary encodings in MP3). If I had an external players (either portable or CD), I'd no doubt stick with LAME mp3 simply for the sake of compatibility. However, for now, and until I re-encode, ignorance is bliss. :)
Wouldn't it be great if, instead of just posting files to simply encode these formats from WAVE files, they offered something more useful, like encoding these formats from MP3 format? I'd really like to see an MP3 OGG VQF MP3 converter.
/.ers are, and I quote, "communist anti-american fucks." Just don't tell him I sent you or he'll drive over to my house and shoot me, because "back in the day we used to shoot these people." And no, I'm not kidding.
And for those that will debate that there is an Ogg Vorbis encoder plug-in for Winamp, I'm not talking real-time conversion, I'm talking FAST conversion. Maybe add a normalizer since people don't seem to know how (or why) the hell to normalize anything. Ever. At all. Period. Yep, that would DEFINITELY be nice.
Oh, as a side-note to all you repeat visitors, ICQ UIN 1305571 would like to be trolled since he thinks that all
[insert witty comment here]