Slashdot Mirror


Non-MP3 Codecs?

Vanth Dreadstar asks: "While MP3 is okay, I have begun researching other codecs that would be suitable for my home music use. Lossy codecs such as Ogg Vorbis, AAC, and MPC all seem to have promise, not to mention the lossless codecs such as Shorten (otherwise known as .SHN), LPAC, and FLAC. I would like to know what non-MP3 codecs people are using out there, and why."

7 of 544 comments (clear)

  1. Vorbis and flac by Jeffrey+Baker · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I'm writing a new application and I have chosen the supported audio formats based on practical concerns: license, patent status, and API. MP3 is nice but technically you need to a license from the patent holder to make an encoder. Vorbis has no such limitation so I use it. I use flac for the same reason. Its license agrees with mine.

    Another consideration is the straightforwardness of the API for the library you intend to use. Vorbis has a somewhat reasonble API with a liberal addition of quirks. Also you can easily add metadata to Vorbis files. Ever tried adding metadata to an MP3 file? ID3v1.1 is trivial but ID3v2 has a 95,000 line reference implementation. Uh? UH?

    Any application has to support PCM audio also, since most music collections are primarily on CD.

  2. Re:Windows Media Format... by orbital3 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I recently bought a Rio Volt MP3/WMA CD player, and compared WMA8 with VBR LAME, and LAME won hands down. Both encoders are set to come out around 128kbit, and while both of course have artifacts, the artifacts in WMA are MUCH more noticeable. I guess I'm just alot more sensitive to the type of artifacts WMA produces...

  3. If you have a G4... by 90XDoubleSide · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sticking with MP3s is a no brainer unless you have to use open software for moral reasons, since Apple has enhanced MP3 encoding/decoding for AltiVec, and this is an area where those gigaFlops do wonders at quick, high-quality encodes and freeing up more CPU for your work (or the visualizer :) during playback.

    --
    "Reality is just a convenient measure of complexity" -Alvy Ray Smith
  4. ogg...but what we really need by crystalplague · · Score: 4, Interesting

    is a ftp database and crawler similar to audiogalaxy only for ogg. it would catch on in no time.

  5. for home audio... by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 4, Interesting
    If you're looking to compress files for home audio use, then you may as well go ahead and use one of the lossless compression formats, as adding storage space to a home audio system is trivial and you'll be able to hear comparatively more garbage from lossy compression on your home system (rather than on an earpiece headset or cheapie speakers.)

    Bear in mind that the ~4x compression rate listed for lossless compression schemes is heavily reliant on the input. Don't be surprised if you get 1.5-2.5 compression a lot of the time, and remember that there's a good chance you'll get 1:1 (or worse) compression results with a 'random' enough song file.

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

  6. Which formats support simple batch manipulation? by vrmlguy · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I was going to submit this to "Ask Slashdot", but this seems like a good place to ask.

    JPEG users have available to them some command line utilities that permit simple alteration of images without loss of quality, for example, rotation and flipping. Are there any similar utilities available for any of the major audio compression formats?

    The reason I ask is that I have ripped a number of CDs and the volume levels vary noticibly. I like to listen to MP3s as I work, with the volume turned down far enough that I can hear the music, but any one that I'm on the phone with won't. Unfortuately, there doesn't seem to be a single setting for everything that I've ripped. While I could go back and re-rip, I'd much rather have a toolbox of useful batch utilities. Ideally, it would allow me to write, say, a Perl script that generates a histogram, checks the average and peak volume, and then tweaks a single number in the file header to force it in line with the rest of my collection.

    Is this sort of thing possible?

    --
    Nothing for 6-digit uids?
  7. Arguments for shn by guygee · · Score: 5, Interesting



    After collecting 60 Gb worth of mp3s, I switched to almost strictly shn format
    over 2 years ago. Here is my reasoning:

    1. Stick with a lossless format if you can afford the bandwidth and storage
    space. Plan for the future, when bandwidth and hd space will be much
    more plentiful.

    2. I can definitely hear the difference between lossless and any compressed
    format at 128 kb/s (that annoying wavery sound), and even at 256 kb/s (barely)
    on very delicate passages and high-end speakers.

    3. Also, if you want to reprocess the music (dehiss, dehum, equalize, normalize,
    respatialize, etc) you experience a much more noticeable degradation in the
    sound if you start with a lossy format.

    4. shn is the standard format for trading music.
    It is a lot less work to store in shn then have to decode and reencode every
    time you make a music trade.

    For lots of good links on shn format, see my trading page at
    http://www.vsl.ist.ucf.edu/groups/vtb/TradeList_ 20 01-11-25.html

    (Now that I've come this far, what the hell, trade requests here

    .
    ;-)