Slashdot Mirror


Xiph.org Releases Free Fixed-Point Vorbis Decoder

volsung writes "A lot of us want portable music players with Vorbis support, right? Well, Xiph.org has decided to help speed the process by releasing their integerized Vorbis decoder, named "Tremor," under a BSD-like license. Tremor is a Vorbis decoding library written for CPUs without floating point hardware, like most handheld devices use. It was previously a proprietary library--licensed by theKompany for their Sharp Zaurus player, among others--but now it's available for everyone to use. The release page also gives contact information for many of the popular hardware manufacturers. If you want Vorbis support in your hardware, now is the time to send some emails! (Also, please say thanks to the Xiph.org crew with a donation if you can.)"

251 comments

  1. Yeppee!!! by RinkSpringer · · Score: 2

    Woohoo, finally some *GOOD* news ... however, I thought most MP3 players used hardware decoders. Will they still benefit from this?

    1. Re:Yeppee!!! by beezly · · Score: 1

      Generally, most "hardware" mp3 players are a CPU or DSP running some kind of software to enable them to play MP3s.

    2. Re:Yeppee!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MP3 players won't benefit because ogg vorbis is a different format than mp3.

    3. Re:Yeppee!!! by ShavenYak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Thank you, Mr. Obvious. We know it's a different format, but the reason (one of the reasons, I should say) it hasn't been supported in hardware players is that the available implementations of the codec required floating-point math.

      With that requirement nixed, we might start seeing hardware that supports Ogg as well as MP3 (and WMA... that's been showing up in hardware players lately too).

      --

      Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
    4. Re:Yeppee!!! by tomstdenis · · Score: 3, Informative

      They're not always entirely hardware. Often a "MP3 chip" is nothing more than a DSP processor with onboard ROM. Its cheaper todo it that way and easier to maintain [fixing bugs means recompile the code not rebuild the device]

      However that being said some MP3 players actually have DSP processors and the codecs in RAM [or flash of some sort]. The RIO-Volt IIRC has that functionality. Which means adding Vorbis support is not entirely out of the question.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  2. fp by volsung · · Score: 1, Funny

    f1rst p0st for all my homiez in #vorbis!

    (I always wanted to try and fp my own story.)

    1. Re:fp by 10Ghz · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      "(I always wanted to try and fp my own story.)"

      Keep trying, one day you might make it.

      --
      Lesbian Nazi Hookers Abducted by UFOs and Forced Into Weight Loss Programs - -all next week on Town Talk.
  3. Hands up who wants a vorbis portable? by szyzyg · · Score: 2

    Now put them down and get writing to the manufacturing companies!

  4. No FPU required... by VValdo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This was a big stumbling block in getting RIO & iPod type players to support Ogg.

    Any idea if this means we can look forward to some Ogg lovin' built-in to consumer products? Timetable?

    Thanks Xiph!
    W

    --
    -------------------
    This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:No FPU required... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RTFA.

  5. Nice.. by simp · · Score: 1

    This is just in time... Are there any flash upgradable MP3 players out that can take advantage of this??

    1. Re:Nice.. by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      Yes... yes there are... and the NEX-II could be the very first player to support Ogg/vorbis with this release if the company making it would get going quickly! (Hell a hack that replaces wma with ogg would be awesome!)

      But the actual first player to use this and give you the first portable ogg player is going to be.... Archos Jukebox 6000, Archos Jukebox Studio and Archos Jukebox Recorder MP3 players.
      and you cant watch it happen right here

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Nice.. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      http://sourceforge.net/projects/rockbox is the actualy link... these guys already have replaced the firmware with theirs... adding the ogg vorbis support will be trivial.... I'd almost bet you'd see it there faster than any company can do it.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Nice.. by Deth_Master · · Score: 1

      I'm personally hoping that Rio will make a flash update for OggVorbis for the SP250. They've released an update that gives it a different visualizaion, hopefully they'll be nice and add Ogg support. Since the codec is out they shouldn't have too much trouble doing it. It's a matter of demand. So, if you own a Rio Volt SP250 contact SonicBlue or directly at their customer support page (for the sp250)
      Thanks

      --
      find ~your -name '*base* | xargs chown :us
    4. Re:Nice.. by ViXX0r · · Score: 1

      I've got ogg deocde ability on my Yopy. had it for about a week. Hacked ogg123 into using an earlier version of a fixed point ogg decoder (libfixpvorbis) released by another individual.

      Very cool.

      --
      University - a box of academia nuts.
    5. Re:Nice.. by eshefer · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure the proc in the archos can handel decoding of ogg in RT (the decoding af mp3 is done by a closed DSP, not the proc it self)

      I hope it can..

    6. Re:Nice.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frontier Labs NexII...

    7. Re:Nice.. by BestNicksRTaken · · Score: 0

      I Emailed them using your link, included the link to the xiph.org page too, this would be absolutely great if they would do it.

      I added the marketing point that they may like about getting into open source ahead of the Archos and supporting more formats than the iPod.

      --
      #include <sig.h>
  6. Hrrrrmmm by Tyler+Eaves · · Score: 1

    Ya know, I bet the Kompany is probably pissed....

    --
    TODO: Something witty here...
    1. Re:Hrrrrmmm by volsung · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, Emmett says they were cool with it. None of the people who had licensed the code earlier have to pay any money from this point on, so they are pretty happy, actually.

  7. 2 Questions by Buck2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I was wondering if someone with more relevant knowledge than I might make an estimation about how much more quickly we might expect to see Ogg support now that this has happened. Are embedded chips without FPU really that much more prevalent, or are they just that much cheaper?

    I also wanted to know, on a side note, why the hell portable mp3 players don't come with a damn FM tuner in them. Is it a design/form factor issue? Perceived marketability problem?

    I want to use my mp3/ogg player while at the gym ... listen to Howard Stern and then switch to music when it gets dull/commercials. Is this so complicated?

    --

    As my father lik@(munch munch)... ....
    1. Re:2 Questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're not looking too hard if you haven't seen the Nomad II from Creative Labs. Or the Rio Volt 250.

    2. Re:2 Questions by Buck2 · · Score: 1

      I see the Nomad II with a max size of 128 MB (I'd be a bit happier and willing to pay a bit more for more storage). The Rio Volt 250 plays off of CDs (which is not preferable to me). Yes, these both have FM tuners ... but there are also roughly eight-hundred other mp3 playing devices out there that have different features (smaller and/or more memory and/or different decoders and/or different interfaces, etc) that do NOT have FM tuners.

      I just wonder because an FM tuner is like beyond dirt cheap ... why aren't they just standard?

      --

      As my father lik@(munch munch)... ....
    3. Re:2 Questions by BlaisePascal · · Score: 2

      Some portable MP3 players do come with FM tuners. The salient sales factors that led me to get the one I got (a RioVolt SP250) was a) support for CD and MP3/WMA on CD-ROM (and the OS-independence that goes with that), b) FM radio built in, and c) flash-upgradeable firmware (so it could eventually support Ogg Vorbis).

      I've already emailed Sonic Blue customer support about Ogg Vorbis support, so hopefully soon they will listen to us and provide it.

    4. Re:2 Questions by AT · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Intel StrongARM chip is pretty popular in embedded devices, including the Zaurus, iPod and other PDAs and portable music players. While the chips have an excellent power consumption vs performance and price ratio, it lacks a hardware FPU.

      I'm not sure companies choose the StrongARM because it's cheaper than chips with a FPU. More likely, they choose it because it is supported by GCC, Linux, Windows CE and hundreds of commercial tools. It is low power, widely deployed, and relatively powerful for a low power chip. And having Intel behind it doesn't hurt. In short, it is a very low risk platform with significant advantages and a few minor disadvantages (no FPU).

    5. Re:2 Questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perceived lack of demand and complexity.

      Small is hip. The cheapest of players are 2 or 3 chip solutions, if that- one chip to drive the CF or Smartmedia slot, one to decode the music, and maybe another to control the LCD and/or the other two.

      Now, add a radio; you need another chip. A chip that could be charged as profit or price-cut- nobody really wants to have to charge $200 for the modern equivalent of a Walkman, they'd love to be down in Discman/Walkman price ranges, something that's only beginning to happen with the CD-based players and the ghettoest of the CF ones.

      So, putting the tuner in becomes unnecessarily messy, and since people outside of reasonably sized metro areas get lousy reception from a portable anyway, it hasn't caught on.

      What would make a lot of sense is a headphone jack with DC rails next to it... get a pair of headphones or an extension cord with the proper (standardized) jack and the tuner built into that. Would be messy, but wouldn't cost them much of anything to implement, and you could add-on the $5 tuner if you really wanted while retaining some portabilitude.

    6. Re:2 Questions by BestNicksRTaken · · Score: 0

      Erm, I think the main selling points for the StrongARM are:

      designed by ARM Ltd - NOT Intel (Intel now *sell* it)

      very low power consumption

      very easy to program

      later models (SA1100 etc.) have a lot of built-in "computer on a chip" stuff like support for MPEG, I/O, graphics, sound, ethernet built in.

      --
      #include <sig.h>
    7. Re:2 Questions by AT · · Score: 1

      designed by ARM Ltd - NOT Intel (Intel now *sell* it)

      Yes, Intel selling it is a positive, particularly for companies who want to base their product on it; after all, Intel isn't going anywhere for a while (or at least will survive longer than the average chipmaker...). The fact that ARM, and not Intel, designed the thing isn't a selling point, unless you are of the opinion anything that comes out of Intel is trash, which is a bit harsh, IMHO.

    8. Re:2 Questions by deveco · · Score: 1

      Well, A question that was brought up in Portable Ogg Players? comments should now have an answer.
      That question is, how much ram will the decoder take? This is a sub-question of: Will oggs play on portibles based off the on the Cirrus 7209 or 7309 CPUs? (These CPUs are in the NomadII and the rio600)

      --
      Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?
    9. Re:2 Questions by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 2

      Actually, the StrongARM was designed by DEC; ARM only designed the ISA.

    10. Re:2 Questions by BestNicksRTaken · · Score: 0

      Yeah that's true - my first SA110 was a Digital rev K, my latest one is Intel Rev. T :-(

      --
      #include <sig.h>
    11. Re:2 Questions by CvD · · Score: 1

      Dude,
      Then you haven't looked harde enough. I dunno if this is what you are looking for, but there's an excellent MP3 CD player the iRiver SlimX. Very sexy design, very slim, and has an FM tuner.

  8. Nice, but I hope they stick around by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is good news, but without a big corp behind it I'm sceptical about whether hardware manufacturers will adopt it. What I'm more worried about now is Xiph themselves though. They've done a great job, and given us this fantastic gift, but now how do they make money? If the library was originally proprietary, then what do they have now?

    1. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by GalionTheElf · · Score: 0, Troll
      Secret Xiph plan to make money:

      1: Release free decoder
      2: ???
      3: Profit!

      --
      I'm going over here and I don't know why!
    2. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by iabervon · · Score: 5, Informative

      They're contractors. They wrote this on contract for someone, and the contract allowed them to give it away after a while (IIRC). They weren't selling this in the first place. They wrote the floating-point vorbis, and then they were contacted by a company who wanted a fixed-point version and were willing to pay them to write it. Now they're giving away the fixed-point version in addition to the floating-point version, and probably working on other stuff for other people, with a similar deal.

      It's like working for a software company. Once you've written something for them, you give it away (to the company); you continue to make money by getting paid to write more software, not being paid royalties or paid for licenses for the stuff you wrote previously.

    3. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by Gigs · · Score: 1

      Secret Xiph plan to make money:

      1. Contract to write software.
      2. Write software.
      3. Get Paided on contract. ...
      If you understood anything about how economics work you might see past the tripe you've had spouted to you and believed because it easier than to learn something for yourself.

    4. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by uhoreg · · Score: 2, Informative

      Notice that xiph.org is a .org and not .com domain. Then notice that their web page states that they are a non-profit corporation, and that there is a link for donating to them. Re-read the writup in this article and see that it also has a link to their donation page.

      --

      To get something done, a committee should consist of no more than three persons, two of them absent.

    5. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I done did my work then I got paided. I'm taking the little woman down to the roadhouse for some fancy folk eatin' tonight.

    6. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by robslimo · · Score: 1

      $ Ka-Ching $ I just donated $5. I believe this is software worth supporting. It might just be one of the rare cases where "good tech" can squeeze 'tween the cracks in the wall of "big clout". Sure hope so.

    7. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by PD · · Score: 0

      Your plan:

      1) Rudely put down other's posts.
      2) ?????
      3) Get your ass kicked!

    8. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by Sesse · · Score: 1

      What did you think the "Donate" link was for? :-) /* Steinar */

      --
      (This comment is of course GPLed.)
    9. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 2

      Well, without this maneuver, they would pretty much be guaranteed to have a lovely music-format design that went nowhere. Now, there is a faint possibility that Ogg will be adopted into various devices.

    10. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by trelanexiph · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're scared Xiph.Org is going somewhere? I can safely assure you we're not. Xiph is still rocking, Vorbis is just the beginning, the Ogg Vorbis Streaming archatecture, Ices/Icecast is on the way, a guy named trelane (well me) has been doing a lot of shellscripting and automated integration work to take a stock *ix box to a streaming multimedia platform with a few keypresses, and next year... ooh baby next year, the beauty of Theora will be released upon the world. That's all the iceburg, save the tip, and the tip is a supersecret (not) project that you're just gonna have to wait to find out about. Worst part of this one is they put me in charge of it... MUAHAHAHAHAHA! GO XIPH AND GET FISHED BABY!

    11. Re:Nice, but I hope they stick around by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get a fucking grip. Jesus. I guess you're just more fuel for the stereotype that Open Source = psychopaths.

  9. One question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, the Zaurus's main CPU does not have a FPU? Can someone comment on this? I was eying the Zaurus today, specially since best buy has the lowest price of 300 bucks for one now.

    1. Re:One question... by cduffy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Most embedded CPUs (and all the StrongARMs, IIRC) don't. Nothing unusual there -- needing an FPU is kinda' rare on a tiny system, and putting it in is inappropriate in such cases where size, power consumption and per-unit cost are at such premiums.

    2. Re:One question... by volsung · · Score: 2
      It's a StrongARM ~200MHz CPU. One way to lower the price of a chip is to axe the floating-point support because it saves silicon. For most things, the FPU doesn't matter, but for audio processing it sucks unless you take the time to rewrite your code to not do floating point math. It can be done, but it takes some careful consideration.

      Nearly every moderately priced handheld device I can think of does not have an FPU, so this isn't a limitation specific to the Zaurus.

    3. Re:One question... by mgessner · · Score: 1

      Depends on what you mean by "embedded." I've been doing a lot of embedded work on PowerPC's, and the 60x-based ones all have FPU's. Also depends on what you mean by "tiny."

      --
      "Sometimes the truth is stupid." - Lawrence, creator of Prime Intellect
  10. you really gotta love that BSD license by TechnoVooDooDaddy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I know that everyone is down on the BSD and up on the GPL, but we owe a tremendous amount to the BSD license.. Companys (like microsoft) took up stuff like the TCP/IP stack, BIND, etc..

    and I believe OGG will achieved the same popularity and extension that it's other BSD Licensed bretheren enjoy. It's gotta be the freedom of the BSD license that encourages companys to pick up on this stuff, rather than re-inventing the wheel with yet another standard because they don't like a particular clause or so in the license..

    1. Re:you really gotta love that BSD license by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you're not the same kind of person, who at the same time praises BSD, but bitches at monopolies.

    2. Re:you really gotta love that BSD license by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know that everyone is down on the BSD and up on the GPL, but we owe a tremendous amount to the BSD license.. Companys (like microsoft) took up stuff like the TCP/IP stack, BIND, etc..

      It's easy. BSD is pro-business, GPL is anti-business. BSD is the true open source license that lets you do whatever you want with the code while the GPL restricts what you can do unless you release your code along with it. BSD is the best license.

    3. Re:you really gotta love that BSD license by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Score:5, Insightful)

    4. Re:you really gotta love that BSD license by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GPL protects the code and make sure it stays truely free. That's the absolute beauty of it.

      "GPL restricts what you can do unless you release your code along with it"

      You can do whatever you want with the code. But if you want to distribute it in public and not just internally you have to release your modifications. Thus the code stays truely free and out in the open like it should be.

      "GPL is anti-business"

      HAHAHAHA tell that to IBM, Oracle, and Sun.

      "BSD is the best license"

      Obviously not.
      NEXT!

    5. Re:you really gotta love that BSD license by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 2

      I know that everyone is down on the BSD and up on the GPL, but we owe a tremendous amount to the BSD license.. Companys (like microsoft) took up stuff like the TCP/IP stack, BIND, etc..

      Companies can do the same with software licensed under the LGPL, except that they can't co-opt it like they can BSD software. Microsoft is in a position to fork TCP any time they want to and keep using the BSD stack. They also aren't obligated to make public their improvements.

      If only various big wigs would just explain the LGPL to governments, etc., all government-funded software would be LGPLed and both individuals and companies could use it for any purpose, but they couldn't 'steal' it from the public.

    6. Re:you really gotta love that BSD license by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 2
      ...they couldn't 'steal' it from the public.


      Please explain how you can 'steal' code from the public if they still have a copy of it. (I assume that it's the same way that you can 'steal' a song from a musician by illegally copying it. Is that right?)


      In my opinion, all government-funded software should be put in the public domain. The people's taxes paid for it; they should be able to do whatever they want with it. Including modifying it and selling it to someone else.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    7. Re:you really gotta love that BSD license by jandrese · · Score: 2

      Actually, you might be surprised just how much government code makes it out to the world. In general the source that doesn't make it out is the stuff that is either classified (which wouldn't be useful to most open source programmers anyway, since they don't need better missile guidance), or incorperates other copywritten code. For instance, my company often uses the Open Channel Foundation to publish code. Most of the stuff in here isn't really that useful for your average Linux geek, but there is plenty of material nonetheless.

      One of the problems is that the government doesn't bother to build a better web browser, they're building interface kits to expensive milspec satellite systems.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    8. Re:you really gotta love that BSD license by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > and I believe OGG will achieved the same popularity and extension that it's other BSD Licensed bretheren enjoy. It's gotta be the freedom of the BSD license that encourages companys to pick up on this stuff, rather than re-inventing the wheel with yet another standard because they don't like a particular clause or so in the license.. ..so long as a company such as Microsoft doesn't take the BSD'ed implementation, change it just so (see Kerebos debacle) and try to force their proprietary version as a de-facto standard. Yes, Vorbis does have a spec doc, but if MS bundles "MSOV" with WinXP, it would be a difficult force to overcome.

    9. Re:you really gotta love that BSD license by csmiller · · Score: 1
      I'd actually say they should have GPL'ed all thier code, but also allowing it to be used in propriety (closed) program for a fee of, say, $1,000, plus 5cents for each unit sold. The GPL explicatly allows the code's orignial author to relicense under both GPL and any other license, but authors of derived code must ask the orignal author for permission first if it's not GPL'ed.

      This would be the best of all worlds, the free software community gets good audio and video codecs (and free coders/decoders), Xiph gets (hopefully) a good income stream, and business gets a low-cost decoder. Of course, businesses who don't lile this licensing terms are free to spend the time and money writng they own decoder, as Xiph has said, in the past, the codec standard is free and open, but thier code isn't. I'd imagine most buisnesses would pay to relicense (or just GPL it) as its probably cheeper than the development costs unless they are likely to sell a large amount of units.

      --
      It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. --- Albert Einstein
  11. write to the device makers! by Frag-A-Muffin · · Score: 2

    If you own a NEX II like I do, please write to frontier labs and let them know that you'd like an ogg decoder in their firmware and that it's even freely available for them to use now too!

    Then we won't having to worry about that stupid mp3 licensing fee.

    Go OGG Go!!!

    P.S. Thanks xiph.org dudes!!!

    --

    AirSpeak - http://itunes.com/apps/AirSpeak
    1. Re:write to the device makers! by brain159 · · Score: 2

      Believe me, we've been pestering FL for ogg support for the nexII for ages, and they also read the yahoogroup and are aware of what we'd like :-)

    2. Re:write to the device makers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I actually contacted Frontier Labs last year about adding Ogg Vorbis support to their NexII player, and they offered me a contract right then and there. Unfortunately, I was just looking to add a quick hack, and finals came up and then IBM hired me, so, well, it didn't happen. But maybe somebody else could try the same thing.

  12. No. most use fixed point DSPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Most use fixed point DSPs which are pretty much general purpose CPUs.. This code is 100% applicable.

  13. theKompany is screwed by astrashe · · Score: 2

    This is good for the public at large, but I'll bet theKompany feels like suckers for buying a license.

    And I'll bet that this will make it more difficult for Vorbis to sell more licenses for other products down the road.

    1. Re:theKompany is screwed by (startx) · · Score: 2

      actually iirc, theKompany paid them to right the fix-point decoder, with an agreement that after a time they could open it up. basically theKompany wanted to be the first on the block with a new toy, not necissarily the only kid on the block with one.

    2. Re:theKompany is screwed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are 100% wrong. Xiph had alrady written Tremor, and at the same time we had just written our tkcPlayer product for which I wanted Ogg support. Like 2 days before we found out about Tremor we found that we needed an fp library and had been trying to figure out how we wanted to address it, then just by chance Emmett comes into the #zaurus IRC channel and asks if anyone is interested in Tremor, so I jumped on it and about 2 days later we had the ogg support we wanted.

      Shawn Gordon
      President
      theKompany.com

  14. Re:good, but by Slothy · · Score: 3, Informative

    By "they still haven't released a complete specification for the file format, or the audio format", I assume you meant, "Back when Vorbis hit 1.0, I read the full specification and stopped spreading FUD", right?

  15. Apple (OT) by avij · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Everyone here must know that Microsoft is at One Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA 98052-6399, but I hadn't noticed Apple's address before I saw it in the article:

    Wouldn't you like to see Vorbis on the super-sexy iPod? We would, too. Here's some contact information for Apple Computer (URL):

    Apple
    1 Infinite Loop
    Cupertino, CA 95014
    Telephone: 408-996-1010
    Oh, the joys of being able to name the roads if you're a big enough company.
    --

    Follow your Euro bills at EBT
    1. Re:Apple (OT) by dj51d · · Score: 1

      Seagate in Roseville, MN is located on Disc Drive.

    2. Re:Apple (OT) by moyix · · Score: 1

      1 Infinite Loop

      I bet they direct all mail to that address into the circular file

  16. Open digital music player by brejc8 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    I had a project that implemented a MIPS R3000 with everything you needed to run an OS. I even got gcc to compile code. I nearly made a fixed point MP3 player (MAD) to run on it but I run out of time. I found MAD a little complex to walk throuhg and convet each function so it can run without an OS.
    I might have a go with this OGG player and make a fully open source digital music player.

  17. Processor requirements? by dschuetz · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Does anyone familar with this implementation have any idea how processor-heavy it is?

    I ask because people have played with an earlier floating point implementation on the Rio Receiver, and have found that it wasn't terribly usable. I'm a little short on details, but I think it was too intensive for the low-speed CPU in the receiver.

    On the other hand, there has been work to build replacement clients for the Rio Receiver that use FLAC lossless compression, and that apparently works pretty well. So the current thinking is to transcode .ogg to flac at the server level. Or just to rip everything to flac (which requires a whole lot more disk space. :( )

    1. Re:Processor requirements? by zsazsa · · Score: 5, Informative

      Does anyone familar with this implementation have any idea how processor-heavy it is?

      Using tkcPlayer on my Sharp Zaurus (which uses this library,) Ogg Vorbis playback takes up less CPU than mp3 playback (and the .oggs take up less space - it's a win-win situation.)

    2. Re:Processor requirements? by Josh+Coalson · · Score: 2, Informative
      I ask because people have played with an earlier floating point implementation on the Rio Receiver, and have found that it wasn't terribly usable. I'm a little short on details, but I think it was too intensive for the low-speed CPU in the receiver.

      I think they were using a fixed-point implementation (see here). Maybe (probably) Tremor is a more optimal implementation. I suspect we'll find out soon enough.

      The chip used in the Rio Receiver I believe is pretty common in other designs (PhatBox, Empeg/Rio Car, AudioTron) and seems like it's becoming the de facto measuring stick for whether or not a codec will run in consumer hardware.

      On the other hand, there has been work to build replacement clients for the Rio Receiver that use FLAC lossless compression, and that apparently works pretty well. So the current thinking is to transcode .ogg to flac at the server level. Or just to rip everything to flac (which requires a whole lot more disk space. :( )

      FLAC adoption happened relatively fast after a free integer decoder library was available (though it is LGPL, not BSD, which has caused some hiccups). So if that's any indication, if Tremor can run on the Rio Receiver it should catch on quickly.

    3. Re:Processor requirements? by afidel · · Score: 2

      Why does everyone say .oggs are smaller? I rip everything using Lame with the r3mix settings and in blind A/B/C testing I have to use ogg at q6 or q7 to not be able to pick out the ogg file with 80% accuracy. The mp3 file is not distinguishable from the wav even with my Sennheisers, but some tracks are easy to pick out even at q6. At q7 my average vbr ogg is areound 220-250kbit/s whereas the lame mp3's are 192-220kbit/s. For reference my first file I tested was Alicia Keys - Piano and I, track 1 off her album, there is a mic crack about 10 seconds in and a bass/snare combo at about 1:12 that tripped up ogg until I cranked it up to q7.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    4. Re:Processor requirements? by jtosburn · · Score: 1

      The Zaurus has a DSP specifically for audio decoding. So mp3/ogg playback ought to have negligible impact on the ARM cpu. A meaningful datum of processor usage would have to either measure this DSP, or use a device that lacks any additional processing power.

    5. Re:Processor requirements? by jonathan_ingram · · Score: 1

      cut a section of the .wav file, flac it up, and post it as a bug on Xiph's bugzilla page (bugs.xiph.org). They can't improve the encoder until they know about failure cases.

    6. Re:Processor requirements? by zsazsa · · Score: 2

      For me, .oggs have a lower bitrate for 'acceptable' quality. When I'm playing music on my Zaurus, I'm using my little earbuds (Sennheiser MX500) in pretty busy environments. The headphone jack of the Zaurus isn't the cleanest thing in the world, either.

      When using the Zaurus, my primary concern is file size, as I only have a 128MB SD card. For serious listening at home, I've tended to stick with LAME VBR for MP3s.

    7. Re:Processor requirements? by Josh+Coalson · · Score: 1
      I think they were using a fixed-point implementation (see here [comms.net]). Maybe (probably) Tremor is a more optimal implementation. I suspect we'll find out soon enough.

      Wow, didn't realize how soon; the PhatBox guys have already tried it.

    8. Re:Processor requirements? by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      and the .oggs take up less space - it's a win-win situation

      I'd say that it's a no-win(dows) situation.

    9. Re:Processor requirements? by mabinogi · · Score: 2

      Where ogg really wins out, is at q0 - q3, the oggs will be quite acceptable (especially on crappy speakers), and an mp3 with the same file size will have the horrible hollow metalic sound to it that you get from low bitrate mp3s.

      I did some comparisons with lame and bladeenc, and oggenc, and found that ogg at q2 was pretty much indistinguishable from the original wav. There was maybe a slight difference in overall sound, but not noticable unless you compared pretty closesly to the original. And there were definely no artifacts in the .ogg that weren't alredy in the original recording.
      The mp3s however, had the awful metalic sound, and very noticeable tendancy to mush the high end sounds.... 'S's at the end of words became 'Shhh' and cymbals sounded bad, and drums lost their crispness severly.

      Naturally you're not going to want to use q2 for archival quality sound, but then it's the low bitrate quality that matters on portable audio players anyway.

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    10. Re:Processor requirements? by afidel · · Score: 1

      hehe low quality in portables, only if you buy one based on something like SD. I'm getting my iPod tomorrow and that has more space than I need even for all my albums encoded in vbr mp3. I could probably even get through the day on a CF based player using just my existing CF cards that I have for my digital camera. In a couple years I dont plan to even use compression, if the same tech in the IBM microdrives was scaled to 1.8" disks and pixy dust added you could have an iPod with an ~80GB capacity, twice the size of my current hdd and it probably wouldn't cost any more than my current iPod.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    11. Re:Processor requirements? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm, no it doesn't; it just has a StrongARM. Admittedly, the StrongARM has a fast multiply, but that does not make it a DSP.

    12. Re:Processor requirements? by 13Echo · · Score: 2

      The only reason that I haven't switched to OGG is because my entire collection is R3-mix 128 LAME encoded MP3s. I have trouble topping the quality.

      Ogg is great for smaller, higher quality files when compared to MP3. But when you get to large file sizes for each format, then it doesn't really matter to me. When portable OGG vorbis players show up, then I'll make the switch (I don't care for Thomson's royalties on MP3). But until then, it's LAME VBR MP3s for the most crisp, compact sound possible, and the greatest flexibility.

  18. Tilting at windmills by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll
    All ten vorbis users jump for joy.

    Hey all you 1000 million mp3 users, follow us!

    1. Re:Tilting at windmills by The_Dougster · · Score: 1

      > All ten vorbis users jump for joy.

      Geez, what is this guy, some kind of mp3 activist? Why don't you just take your mp3s and go somewhere and listen to them instead of trolling at those kind-hearted Xiph developers who's only goal was to give you a free music codec. So you like mp3s, fine, but keep your trap shut in this discussion about Vorbis.

      Don't be ripping on me shillelagh!

      --
      Clickety Click ...
    2. Re:Tilting at windmills by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point Dougster.
      Case in point.... Every copy of Vegas Video 3.x has the option to output audio into Ogg Vorbis format.
      Vegas Video has built in professional multitrack audio recording and mixing tools along with CD ripping/burning tools too.

      So for the uninitiated. In addition to the shareware/freeware market, there are professional recording and mixing tools to create Ogg Vorbis audio.

      Free from MP3 in 2K3! hehehe

    3. Re:Tilting at windmills by Jason+Earl · · Score: 2

      He's just cranky because Thomson is doing its level best to kill MP3 so that they can replace it with MP3Pro, and along comes the Ogg format which is both better and cheaper (and now available on FP-less processors).

      If Ogg really catches on, future hardware might not support MP3, and those folks with large MP3 collections will be in the same boat as people with large 8-track collections.

    4. Re:Tilting at windmills by Carlos+Laviola · · Score: 1

      If Ogg really catches on, future hardware might not support MP3, and those folks with large MP3 collections will be in the same boat as people with large 8-track collections.

      You mean everyone living in 2002, right? Just FYI, I'll always have my xmms, LAME et all source code tarballs with me. Ogg is a great idea, but I'm sticking to what I already have burned on lots of recordable CDs.

    5. Re:Tilting at windmills by CalicoJck · · Score: 1

      1000 million? I could have sworn there were at least 1 billion!

    6. Re:Tilting at windmills by Jason+Earl · · Score: 2

      Yes, there will always be software MP3 decoders, they might even continue to compile with new compilers on modern operating systems. But if Ogg becomes the new standard and MP3 becomes a legacy format then MP3 enthusiasts will find it hard to find MP3 hardware. Your new stereo will understand the Ogg format, but not MP3, for example. If you only use your computer to listen to your MP3s, then you are safe, otherwise the future standard for digital music matters.

    7. Re:Tilting at windmills by Valar · · Score: 1

      It is really easy to convert a large mp3 collection to vorbis. It isn't at all the same thing as having to manually copy all of your 8-tracks to tape to CD and then rip them to mp3. One shell script and you could convert your entire collection. At no cost.

    8. Re:Tilting at windmills by bukharin · · Score: 1

      ... At no cost.

      At the cost of sound quality. Converting from one lossy codec to another is almost synergistically bad for audio quality.

      About the only exception is Ogg Vorbis' ability to downsample an audio stream perfectly (ie encode at 128, downsample to 64 -> exactly the same as if it was originally encoded at 64).

      bukharin

    9. Re:Tilting at windmills by Valar · · Score: 1

      You can downsample in any format pretty much without it sounding any different than if it were originally formatted that way. What you can't do without significant artifacts is go from lower quality to higher, in any format. And believe it or not, high quality mp3 to high quality ogg conversion doesn't cost you anything in the audible range.

  19. Solid Engine by _bug_ · · Score: 1

    I've been using tkc's player on my Zaurus for a month now and it's been solid. This is great news to hear it's under a BSD-style license.

    However I still recommend Zaurus owners shell out the 10 bucks for tkc's player to help support further development of Zaurus applications.

    1. Re:Solid Engine by DaWorm · · Score: 1
      tkcPlayer is great I agree, but you might also want to try out the XMMS port which came out a few days ago. Rock solid too, plays ogg flawlessly, although there are still some issues regarding UI and stability. I ripped my Hendrix CDs (gotta love listening to Machine Gun at work) to ogg and loading them in a big compact flash card. It's a bright future ahead for all of us.

      X Multimedia System for the Sharp Zaurus

      --
      Alea jacta est!
  20. can't put media player in your pocket. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, you can use MS media player to play Vorbis (with the optional plugins) but you can't put that in your pocket.

  21. This is GREAT news... by MasteroftheVoxel · · Score: 1

    First Apple announces that they will make their iPod's compatible with PCs and now there is a fixed-point Vorbis decoder!

    I was hesistant in buying an iPod because all my music is in ogg vorbis format (and with good reason, given all the legal issues that are coming up with mp3). The iPod processor is capable of decoding Vorbis but it is fixed-point and I was desperately waiting for someone to port over the algorithm and I even considered undertaking the project myself.

    But now that they have released the fixed-point implementation it should be any day now that we see a port to the iPod making it the best portable digital music player and a truly kick-ass piece of hardware. Now if it would only take standard AA batteries...

  22. Re:theKompany is screwed (not) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually not at all. We didn't pay a big licensing fee for Tremor and this came about before we paid any royalties, so it works out just fine for us. We love Xiph and Ogg Vorbis and have lots more stuff coming along to continue working with them. We have a nice easy to use and multi-platform (later this week) ripper for Ogg Vorbis called tkcOggRipper which you can check out at www.thekompany.com/projects/tkcoggripper. We also have an entirely ogg based internet radio station coming online shortly at www.progrock.com - we ripped about 350 CD's using tkcOggRipper, and we have even more fun stuff ahead.

    Rock on Xiph and may Ogg Vorbis rule the day!

    Shawn Gordon
    President
    theKompany.com
    www.thekompany. com

  23. Finally! by gpinzone · · Score: 2

    The lack of a floating point processor in most mp3 players was a major technical problem with vendors adding ogg support to their hardware. Now that a non-fp codebase is available for the taking, this could very well mean the beginning of widespread ogg acceptance! My only concern would be the following: If was a company like Sony and I did some R&D to improve the quality of ogg files in order to give my products a competative edge over other brands, would I have to make those improvements open source?

    1. Re:Finally! by StillaCoward · · Score: 1

      No
      BSD style lisense....

      Speaking of Sony, time to bug them to support this on my NR70V!

  24. Naming the roads by FuzzyDaddy · · Score: 1
    You get to name the road if you're the only one on the road when they name it. So big companies, when they build a new building/complex and a new road, get to name the road.

    Sometimes even small fries get to name a road, if they're the only residence on it.

    (Yes, I know I'm offtopic...)

    --
    It's not wasting time, I'm educating myself.
    1. Re:Naming the roads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somewhere in my travels, I saw a Holiday Inn that had formerly been a Ramada. While they could change the name of the hotel, they could not change the name of the street it was on.
      So on their letterhead is:
      Holiday Inn
      1 Ramada Way

  25. Not that long... by MasteroftheVoxel · · Score: 1

    There was a slashdot story about the fixed-point version being available (as part of the first official release of the spec) only a few weeks ago.

  26. Tremor by SpamJunkie · · Score: 1

    Tremor is a great name. Probably the best name to ever some out of the xiph folks. The only good one actually, besides cdparanoia.

    I propose we adopt Tremor as the name of Vorbis files. Even if it is techically inaccurate and a bit confusing to people who have already put in the effort to figure out what Ogg Vorbis is, in the long run Tremor is a high memorable and markettable name for an audio format. Sounds much cooler than mp3 even.

  27. You still need to bug them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There has been a fixed point implimentation for ages, just not an open publically released one.. the lack of IPOD support is due to lack of interest from Apple.. Your voice counts, go bug them.

    1. Re:You still need to bug them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol, the lack of ipod support is due to the fact that it wasn't 1.0 final yet. Unlike you open sores homos, the rest of the world works with final software (even if it's shit, e.g. MS OSes).

  28. MOD Parent Down, Inaccurate [n/t] by RadioheadKid · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    There is a spec, stop trolling.

    --
    "Karma can only be portioned out by the cosmos." -Homer Simpson
  29. Salut by T3kno · · Score: 2

    /me raises a pint of Murph's and salutes Xiph.org. May MP3 die a fast, utterly shamefull and painfull death.

    --
    (B) + (D) + (B) + (D) = (K) + (&)
    1. Re:Salut by psamuels · · Score: 1
      /me raises a pint of Murph's and salutes Xiph.org.

      <aol/>

      May MP3 die a fast, utterly shamefull and painfull death

      filled with way too many Ls.

      --
      "How can you claim that you are anti-crack, while still writing a window manager?" — Metacity README
  30. Both Licenses are Excellent by FreeUser · · Score: 5, Informative

    I know that everyone is down on the BSD and up on the GPL, but we owe a tremendous amount to the BSD license.. Companys (like microsoft) took up stuff like the TCP/IP stack, BIND, etc..

    The BSD License is an excellent license for some things, just as the GPL is an excellent license for other things.

    OggVorbis is one area where the BSD License makes perfect sense, namely, in an effort to get a published, open format implimented as widely as possible.

    The GPL is an ideal license for persons and companies that wish to make their code available and participate in a public commons, without unconditionally handing their crown jewels over to a competitor. Indeed, there are many commercially written programs whose source code likely wouldn't have been released at all, or would have been released only under really onerous restrictions, such as Microsoft's so-called open license, Sun's community license, or something along those lines.

    Both licenses are excellent. Both philosophies are a positive contribution to the intellectual wealth of humankind, and both have their place. Which one is most applicable to a given set of circumstances depends largely upon those circumstances and the goals in mind.

    In this case, the goal is to spread the use of Ogg Vorbis as far and wide as possible, for which the BSD license is ideal. Indeed, even the FSF, which normally has strong reservations with regard to the BSD license, has endorsed the release of OggVorbis under the BSD license.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    1. Re:Both Licenses are Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a commercially written program, a license like Apple's, Netscape's, Microsoft's or Sun's is much friendlier than the GPL or BSDL. You might not like it, but it's much more ideal (to the company) than GPL, and for most licensees it's just as good. In fact, the only people that don't like it are GPL zealots.

    2. Re:Both Licenses are Excellent by John+Whitley · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Excellent points. In this sense, a BSD-like license seems to be more appropriate than GPL/LGPL where the promotion of an open software-based standard is more important than any single codebase that implements that standard.

      I'm a firmware engineer in this market, and this definitely lowers the barrier to entry for companies who would previously have had to implement a custom Ogg Vorbis codec. Such a project would have been very expensive to undertake, probably prohibitively so. (both in the development cost and in the lead times to a QA'ed and marketable finished product.)

    3. Re:Both Licenses are Excellent by modecx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I really like the idea of Xiph releasing the fixed point decoder, It has the possibility to revolutionize the portable music market.

      However, I'm worried, still. Since it is under the BSD liscense nobody could see changes to the code that manufactures might make. Shoddy/out of spec, or smaller subsets of the Ogg spec could be marketed this way (since the manufactures won't have to open the code for everyone to see), and dilution of faith in Ogg could result. As I see it, someone (maybe Xiph themselves) should contract with manufactures to ensure that their products are Ogg v1.0 compliant (with a sticker on the box to prove it).

      On the plus side, you get the full implementation of Ogg in your favorite portable. Xiph might also have a nice income making sure products using Ogg are within specification.

      On the negative side, products might be slower to deploy, and cost just a tad more.

      That said, Xiph rocks. Them's some good folk.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    4. Re:Both Licenses are Excellent by FreeUser · · Score: 2

      You might not like it, but it's much more ideal (to the company) than GPL, and for most licensees it's just as good. In fact, the only people that don't like it are GPL zealots.

      GPL 'zealots' as you so snidely call them (but, of course, its Microsoft entusiasts, isn't it?), and just about anyone who is interested in contributing their time and energy to products.

      The communities which form up around Apple, Netscape, Microsoft, and Sun's licenses are positively anemic compared to the communities which have sprung up around both the BSD and GPLed licensed projects. Why? Because they give the users and the volunteer developers the least amount of freedom, and no guarantee that their work won't simply be seized from them (indeed, they generally rather state the opposite).

      You are correct, I don't like it. Nor do the vast majority of volunteer developers and users, so much os that Mozilla changed its licensing scheme in order to attract developers (and succeeded by the way), as did Sun with their GPLed release of Open Office.

      Does that make me a GPL zealot? Probably by your definition, since your definition appears to imply anyone not actively trying to malign the GPL is by definition a zealot. However, as one who publicly embraces numerous free licenses, including the BSD license and the GPL, I think I, and most free software enthusiasts, fall well outside of what both the dictionary and the average person would define as a "zealot."

      --
      The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  31. Does it matter at this stage of the game? by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    With MP3 dying a slow death due to the license changes, M$ pushing their format, and the upcoming DRM legal requirments.. does it effect me personally that this exists?

    Sure its nice, and kudos to them for doing this, but isnt it a bit like pissing in the ocean after the boat already set sail?

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Does it matter at this stage of the game? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No more so than it was for Linux to compete on the server against MS. MS currently owns the desktop, but they have pretty much lost the server to Linux.

  32. First fixed point version was over a year ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fixed point Vorbis decoding has been around for a while. Companies aren't getting enough userbase demand for it to matter.

  33. RTFL by great+throwdini · · Score: 2

    My only concern would be the following: If was a company like Sony and I did some R&D to improve the quality of ogg files in order to give my products a competative edge over other brands, would I have to make those improvements open source?

    RTFL:

    Copyright (c) 2002, Xiph.org Foundation

    Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:

    - Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

    - Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.

    - Neither the name of the Xiph.org Foundation nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.

    THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

    1. Re:RTFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS[. . .]

      Looks like they forgot to proofread. That should say "THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS" ("THE REGENTS" referred to the Regents of the University of California in the unmodified BSD licence).

  34. How fast a microprocessor/controller??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting
    This is really some good news. Does anyone have an idea on how fast would a microprocessos have to be to decode ogg??? Could I implement it on, say, an 8051??

    Hugo

  35. One Waxie Way by Wee · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    My favorite road name is near my wife's office. The only address on it is the Waxie people's headquaters at One Waxie Way. It's just so alliterative... I dunno. Then again, I'm easily amused.

    -B

    --

    Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

    1. Re:One Waxie Way by lamp77 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I used to work on atomic blvd, but it was an old warehouse, strange days.

  36. Quality by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2, Troll

    Have there been any REAL double-blind tests as well as equipment tests of quality comparisons between MP3 and Ogg Vorbis yet? They never seem to get done. All the tests so far are of the form "Hey! My music sounds really l33t !!!!!"

    Anybody know of some honest testing across a wide variety of music (particularly instrumental / classical / baroque) that is not just one person's subjective opinion?

    Everyone seems to think that doing a lossy music compressor is just a "matter of cranking it out", but it's an extremely difficult problem. I'm not going to trust a bunch of amateurs until I see some real evidence that they know what they're doing. And no, "test it out yourself" is not an option. I have better things to do with my time, particularly since MP3 is free.

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    1. Re:Quality by EastCoastSurfer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      that is not just one person's subjective opinion?

      The problem is that music as a whole is subjective. Some people like it with a lot of bass, others like it bright. I'm sure that most people are being honest when they say that they like the sound of ogg over mp3 or vise versa. That is why you really have to do the testing yourself (or you can wait for someone with a similar "ear" for music to test for you).

      About the only way I could think of the really test the two formats is to overlay a graph of the outputs of the .wav, .mp3, and .ogg and see which of the formats differ most from the .wav. This method would also have inherent problems because you are only looking at raw output and not what you may possibly hear. Thus, while one format may "look" better than the other it may sound the same or worse depending on which parts of the music it cut out.

    2. Re:Quality by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The problem is that music as a whole is subjective.

      That's why you don't do it subjectively. You use a large number of people, both professional audio people and "normal" people, and you average the results.

      About the only way I could think of the really test the two formats is to overlay a graph of the outputs of the .wav, .mp3, and .ogg and see which of the formats differ most from the .wav.

      There are known, mathematical ways to test audio quality.

      This method would also have inherent problems because you are only looking at raw output and not what you may possibly hear.

      That's why you do both measurement tests and listening tests.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    3. Re:Quality by John+Whitley · · Score: 2

      Full listening tests to evaluate codec quality or perform a comparison are quite laborious and expensive to run. They are done very rarely. The implied "they" in your note -- "They" who should conduct the listening tests -- is also left undefined. Xiph almost certainly doesn't have the resources to run such a test series. If not Xiph, then who else has the financial motive if the result is, in practice, good enough?

      Moreover, your complaint should enompass more than Ogg: few if any shipping MP3 encoders or decoders have actually been run through listening tests to create a baseline comparison with the tested MP3 reference codebase. Virtually all of them have tweaks, refinements, optimizations, etc. that affect the resulting output and quality.

    4. Re:Quality by verloren · · Score: 1

      It's difficult to do fully double-blind tests, because many people who are interested in this kind of structured testing can identify a particular format by the type of artifacts it produces. Having said that here is a pretty rigorous test of a number of formats. Mp3pro comes out top, ogg a very close second, with aac and wma trailing. This only covered 64kpbs samples.

      Note that mp3 wasn't even included - pretty much everyone interested in the topic already knows that mp3 doesn't match up to the best formats such as ogg or mpc (probably not even wma), so there's not a lot of point testing it. It's only use is its wide-ranging hardware compatibility (a good use, mind you :) )

      Oh, and mp3 isn't free, the cost is just hidden.

      Cheers, Paul

    5. Re:Quality by abe+ferlman · · Score: 1

      There are known, mathematical ways to test audio quality.

      For instance, "On a scale of 1 to 10, how much does this sound like a .wma file?"

      --
      microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
    6. Re:Quality by Herkum01 · · Score: 1

      The best way to test this would select only the tallest of all the subjects. It would be OK because it takes longer for sound to actually reach their ears, they would notice distortion more readily than the rest of us mere mortals.

    7. Re:Quality by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      If not Xiph, then who else has the financial motive if the result is, in practice, good enough?

      How about any of the major audio magazines? They do equipment testing all the time.

      Look, I don't mean to be critical of Ogg per se. But there is way too much "rah rah" around here that the only the thing that matters is that Ogg happens to have the source code available, and no one seems to care whether it sounds comparable to MP3 or not. You're probably right that there is far too little analysis of MP3 as well, but it has enough mass distribution that the general public has decided that MP3 is good enough.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    8. Re:Quality by GauteL · · Score: 2

      This is not intended as flamebait at all. This is actually pure curiosity:

      How does 64kbit listening tests apply to the bitrates people actually use?

      I mean just about every mp3 is encoded at 128kbit and beyond. Some people (I can't hear the difference) claim that at least 160kbit is absolutely required for reasonable audio.

      Would the test possibly have a different outcome if tested at 128 or 160kbit? I would assue (although I don't really know) that some codecs will be optimized for lower bitrates, and some for higher.

    9. Re:Quality by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 3, Informative

      There are known, mathematical ways to test audio quality.

      s/quality/fidelity/

      You can measure how accurately an algorithm reproduces a given input signal, but there is no objective mathematical way to measure the quality of the audio, eg, whether the signal is any good in the first place.

      Other than that, you're correct -- a thorough evaluation of an audio algorithm's worth will include both objective (waveform analysis) and subjective (humans listening) testing.

    10. Re:Quality by verloren · · Score: 1

      Well, Microsoft say that 64kbps is CD-quality, so why use anything more? :)

      It's true that different formats work best at different bitrates. Most of the effort on Ogg Vorbis so far has been for lower bitrates (128kbps down), though it works pretty well at higher rates too. MPC I believe works better at higher rates (160kbps+). So while the results are important, they only provide clues to higher bitrates.

      But remember that as the formats get better the lower bitrates are likely to be more important. An mp3 at 128kbps is considered 'good enough' by most people, at least for portable listening. The equivalent _quality_ for ogg vorbis is produced at around 96kbps. If that is 'good enough' for common uses then higher bitrates become less important - why use more space than you need to, when space on a portable is at a premium?

    11. Re:Quality by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      Well, Microsoft say that 64kbps is CD-quality, so why use anything more? :)

      Heh, I was all set to rip you a new one for spouting anti-Microsoft rhetoric, but it turns out they do claim that.

      But you know what? I only listened to the Brandenburg Concerto, but A/Bing between the two sources, it sounds pretty damn good at 64kpbs. Of course, Microsoft is picking the samples, so it may be that it happened to work really well, but still it sounds pretty impressive.

      Based on that one sample I listened to, calling it CD quality was warranted.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    12. Re:Quality by Trane+Francks · · Score: 1

      > I have better things to do with my time,
      > particularly since MP3 is free.

      Ogg Vorbis is free, MP3 is certainly not, whether we're talking beer or speech.

      --
      ...a FreeDOS contributor: http://www.freedos.org/
    13. Re:Quality by rseuhs · · Score: 2
      Heh, I was all set to rip you a new one for spouting anti-Microsoft rhetoric, but it turns out they do claim that

      The funny thing is that WMA is much worse than ogg and MP3pro, so if you could get CD-quality with 64kbps on WMA, you could probably get it with 50kbps or even less with ogg....

    14. Re:Quality by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      Ogg Vorbis is free, MP3 is certainly not, whether we're talking beer or speech.

      Funny, I've downloaded both MP3 encoders and decoders free*. Unless you're talking about commercial use, which I'm not really concerned with.

      *I don't recognize the usage of "free as in freedom" when referring to software. RMS can kiss my ass.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    15. Re:Quality by Trane+Francks · · Score: 1

      > Funny, I've downloaded both MP3 encoders and
      > decoders free*.

      Great, your encoders and decoders were free. MP3 itself is not. This can't be such a leap of understanding, can it? And it should matter, too. Why did Thomson remove the "free for non-commercial" disclaimer from the MP3 license?

      If nothing had changed, it would have been cheaper to leave it in place. They removed it to free up the possibility to exact a fee retroactively.

      Normally, I wouldn't worry about this sort of thing coming true, but with Sun and Microsoft changing EULA's willy-nilly to let them legally muck with the software on our computers, I'm beginning to realize that, ethics be damned, companies will do whatever they feel to be in their best interest.

      MP3 is not free. Good mantra; it even rhymes.

      --
      ...a FreeDOS contributor: http://www.freedos.org/
    16. Re:Quality by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      Great, your encoders and decoders were free. MP3 itself is not. This can't be such a leap of understanding, can it?

      Apparently it is. What part of "free" don't YOU understand? What, are "they" going to come to my door and confiscate my encoding software? Confiscate my players? Yes, there is some (small) risk that in the future, I may have to buy software. Big deal. My existing software works just fine.

      And if they did start charging for it, I'm not sure I would care. I don't have a problem with paying people for a product of value.

      Normally, I wouldn't worry about this sort of thing coming true, but with Sun and Microsoft changing EULA's willy-nilly to let them legally muck with the software on our computers

      Except that Microsoft has not done that. And it wouldn't be legal for them to, anyway. There is no requirement for downloading ANYTHING from Microsoft. And if they tried, rest assured that it would be illegal for them to damage anything on your computer.

      Sorry, but paranoia is not reason.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    17. Re:Quality by Trane+Francks · · Score: 1

      >> Great, your encoders and decoders were free. MP3
      >> itself is not.
      >
      > Apparently it is.

      Apparently, it isn't. From the MP3 Licensing website FAQ:

      "What does it cost?

      A per unit royalty is taken on mp3/mp3PRO products and applications, such as ripping software, jukebox applications, mp3/mp3PRO-enabled CD/DVD players and portable mp3/mp3PRO players. For companies broadcasting, streaming and distributing mp3/mp3PRO-encoded music, the royalty paid is based on the revenue generated."

      The distinction I made is valid: the encoders and decoders you use are free only by virtue of the fact that you downloaded them for free. Thomson does not license software or patents to end users, but it absolutely will go after anybody who sells a product that includes MP3 technology. Red Hat didn't pull MP3 stuff from its distribution because of GPL-fuzzy reasoning, they did so to avoid getting charged for making money on patents they hadn't licensed.

      >> Normally, I wouldn't worry about this sort of
      >> thing coming true, but with Sun and Microsoft
      >> changing EULA's willy-nilly to let them legally
      >> muck with the software on our computers
      >
      > Except that Microsoft has not done that. And it
      > wouldn't be legal for them to, anyway.

      What, it wouldn't be legal for Microsoft to inadvertently break something while attempting to fix something else? It's only one small step further to 100% automate Windows Update. And, last I heard about it, Microsoft has never been held accountable for their software hosing a system and causing data loss.

      The Sun/Microsoft agreements let them upgrade various installed software on the computer. How is that illegal?

      > Sorry, but paranoia is not reason.

      I fail to see where any of my comments have even remotely indicated paranoia. Cautious about EULA's and disappearing "free for non-commercial" clauses? You betcha.

      --
      ...a FreeDOS contributor: http://www.freedos.org/
    18. Re:Quality by WzDD · · Score: 1

      You can measure how accurately an algorithm reproduces a given input signal, but there is no objective mathematical way to measure the quality of the audio, eg, whether the signal is any good in the first place.

      It goes further than that, because the basis of lossy audio compression is the psychoacoustic model which determines which frequencies can be discarded and when. The theory is that compressing and uncompressing a waveform will result in a very different output waveform which will nonetheless approach the "quality" of the original. Different MP3 encoders have different psychoacoustic models and therefore produce entirely different outputs. A waveform that is 4% closer to the original on the average isn't necessarily the product of a superior encoder.

    19. Re:Quality by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      The distinction I made is valid: the encoders and decoders you use are free only by virtue of the fact that you downloaded them for free.

      Exactly. It's free for ME, which is the free I care about. If you want to use it in commercial software, you have to pay a licensing fee. Sounds completely reasonable to me. But hey, YMMV. If you want to do something commercial, then Vorbis might be a good alternative for you. But since I don't want to do anything commercial (nor the vast majority of the population), MP3 is entirely free.

      Red Hat didn't pull MP3 stuff from its distribution because of GPL-fuzzy reasoning, they did so to avoid getting charged for making money on patents they hadn't licensed.

      Big deal. Then you download it from somewhere else. Once again, it's freely available out there. It's not going to decay and rot.

      What, it wouldn't be legal for Microsoft to inadvertently break something while attempting to fix something else?

      The key word there is "inadvertently".

      And, last I heard about it, Microsoft has never been held accountable for their software hosing a system and causing data loss.

      That's because it's all "inadvertent" and unintentional. The day that Microsoft starts intentionally causing data loss or destruction of private property is the day they are in deep shit. No EULA, no matter what it says, will give them the right to do that.

      The Sun/Microsoft agreements let them upgrade various installed software on the computer. How is that illegal?

      It's not, because you are authorizing them to update the Windows operating system, including applications associated with the distribution. You are not authorizing them to modify your data files, nor changes your third-party applications.

      I fail to see where any of my comments have even remotely indicated paranoia.

      Worrying about Microsoft modifying and/or destroying your personal data files and/or modifying third party applications is well into downtown Paranoia.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    20. Re:Quality by Trane+Francks · · Score: 1

      >> inadvertently break something while attempting to
      >> fix something else?
      >
      > The key word there is "inadvertently".

      Sure, and I even thought of it myself.

      > Worrying about Microsoft modifying and/or
      > destroying your personal data files and/or
      > modifying third party applications is well into
      > downtown Paranoia.

      I think you're confusing the issues here. I, for one, am not worried about this happening. But since you want to discuss the nasty side of business, it's quite possible under such an agreement that software would be "inadvertently" broken during an upgrade quite on purpose. Ever hear of OS/2 For Windows and how a particular MS bugfix suddenly made things very difficult for OS/2?

      With the DOJ attention that MS has received over the last few years, I suspect it's unlikely we'll see the likes of the Win vs. OS/2 debacle again, but the precedent _has_ already been set.

      Cheers, mate. Good comments and an interesting discussion.

      --
      ...a FreeDOS contributor: http://www.freedos.org/
    21. Re:Quality by verloren · · Score: 1

      One of the problems with testing wma is that it boosts the volume of anything it encodes. People tend to prefer the louder of two samples, so it gives wma a boost that has nothing to do with quality.

    22. Re:Quality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      all tests are subjective. human listening is waveform analysis. your dichotomies are false!

    23. Re:Quality by sasami · · Score: 1

      It's free for ME, which is the free I care about.

      Sigh. I question whether I should even bother...

      Stealing a car does not make cars free.

      Copying Photoshop does not make Photoshop free software.

      Downloading an unlicensed encoder does not make MP3 a free and open standard.

      --
      Dum de dum.

      --
      Freedom is not the license to do what we like, it is the power to do what we ought.
    24. Re:Quality by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      Downloading an unlicensed encoder does not make MP3 a free and open standard.

      Where did this come from? I never said I downloaded an unlicensed encoder. There are tons of free, licensed ones out there.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    25. Re:Quality by sasami · · Score: 1
      Let me re-quote, then:
      The distinction I made is valid: the encoders and decoders you use are free only by virtue of the fact that you downloaded them for free. (Trane Francks)
      Exactly. It's free for ME (Reality Master 101)
      MP3 is not a free standard, regardless of the existence of free downloads. Trane Francks even went so far as to quote the license itself. The "tons of free, licensed encoders" you mention do not exist. They're all unlicensed, unless you've found one whose author is fronting the $5/unit+$15k/yearly royalty to Thomson. Non-commercial use is irrelevant for encoders (and now they're claiming that for decoders, too).

      I will happily continue to use LAME, but I'm under no delusions about its legality, and neither are its developers.

      --
      Dum de dum.
      --
      Freedom is not the license to do what we like, it is the power to do what we ought.
    26. Re:Quality by Sunnan · · Score: 1

      Not really.

  37. Give feedback to Apple! by binaryfeed · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:Give feedback to Apple! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My prediction: each and every one of your emails will be soundly ignored.

    2. Re:Give feedback to Apple! by John+Whitley · · Score: 5, Insightful

      At last, someone with the right idea. The embedded digital audio space is a volatile new market, with a bunch of relatively young companies and/or young divisions within large companies (which is much the same thing for my purposes here) vying for marketshare. Feature sets end up being defined in two general ways: 1) via feedback about a shipping product (market success or failure, direct user feedback, etc), or 2) marketing gets the idea that customers Must Have This Feature. User feedback can make a difference in this latter model.

      Ogg isn't yet big enough on its own to be an automatic target for these electronics marketing divisions. It needs grassroots backing to give it the same boost that MP3's mindshare and Micosoft's market power (WMA) have done for those formats already.

      This codebase makes this grassroots effort VERY VIABLE. So write your favorite digital audio portable company (be brief -- you're talking to marketing) and ask for Ogg Vorbis support. FWIW, Apple's design prowess made big waves in this industry. If Apple adds Ogg it, it's very likely that it will become a bullet on everyone else's next product feature list. (Note: the iPod uses an ARM-based processor.)

    3. Re:Give feedback to Apple! by elohim · · Score: 1

      this is really important! mod parent up.

    4. Re:Give feedback to Apple! by danielp · · Score: 1

      Direct feedback on the iPod via this link!

    5. Re:Give feedback to Apple! by rthille · · Score: 1

      Are you crazy? Apple would never start using some off the wall, 'open source' software with a BSD license!

      Oh, wait... :-)

      --
      Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
    6. Re:Give feedback to Apple! by Now15 · · Score: 1

      Dear Apple,

      Please add Ogg Vorbis audio support to iTunes and iPod, even if it's "only there if you look for it". Xiph have released an integer decoder that should work fine on the iPod's processors. The advantages of supporting Vorbis are numerous:

      * You will recieve huge community kudos for being the first major vendor to support the patent-free format. This mindshare alone would be worth gold.

      * Token gesture acknowledgement of Vorbis will stimulate its acceptance immensely. It's the community which will bring new codecs to a critical mass. Product manufacturers like Apple can only benefit from the proliferation of license-free technologies.

      * You will offer a credible alternative to MP3 and AAC. Vorbis can compress music files below 96kbps and still sound as good as a 160kbps MP3.

      * The smaller file means more songs will fit in on-board memory, meaning the hard disk will be used less. Therefore, Vorbis users will be less likely to suffer warranty issues with their hard drive.

      * The reduction in hard drive use would prolong battery charge. It's always good to keep existing customers feeling pleased about their purchases, and anything that can improve battery life would make existing customers very happy indeed.

      All the above points can go towards luring new customers to the iPod (and then the Mac), or will make existing customers happier (who will then evangelise their product more). I can't possibly see any disadvantage.

      Regards,

      --

      Computers are useless: they can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso
  38. AudioTron support for Vorbis? by Wee · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Does anyone know if there's planned AudioTron support for Vorbis? I spent a long time looking through their site, the discussion boards, etc this weekend and found nothing. I don't even know that it's possible via a firmware upgrade.

    I don't care about portables, it's my home system I'm curious about. XMMS I don't so much worry about, but I'm not going to replace hardware. What I have works for me, and if I have to use .mp3 with it, then I will, no matter what license the format has. I suspect a lot of people that have bought and are using MP3-only hardware feel and will act the same way, at least until that hardware gets replaced. mayeb what we need is for new hardware to decode both formats? I could see phasing in Vorbis decoders as being easily doable.

    I really wish OGG would have been around (read: taken off) like in 1997...

    -B

    --

    Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

    1. Re:AudioTron support for Vorbis? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not.... Yes it is capable... but the audiotron is a windows CE based device.(dont believe me? open the case and stare at the WinCE license sticker on the Cirrus processor board that looks suspiciousally like the cirrus refrence design platform. it's just a plain olde soundcard+processor in there... and the processor is basically a low power pentium (133 approx) The turtle beach guys did a great job at removing all the crap that is windows CE and making a solid product that just works.. most of the time... there's still the stupid SMB sharing problems that have been ever prevalent in the base Windows code that will never ever get fixed... maybe someone someday will reverse the audiotron and make a bsd or linux os for it that will give us awesome capabilitiies with it (turtle radio is a bog moneymaker for them.... the amount of demographics they collect from your butt out of the machine is a goldmine!

    2. Re:AudioTron support for Vorbis? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Myself and others have requested Vorbis support on the Turtlebeach fourm site, and the response has been that support is presently impractical because they do not have an ARM optimized decoder.

      I am not familiar enough with the specific types of optimization they may be refering to but since their ARM implementation lacks a FPU, I'd assume that this fixed point implementation is at least a step in the right direction.

      Information my presumptions are based on was found here: Prefect's Pages

  39. Yay! And Yawn! by pclminion · · Score: 2
    Yay, because now Vorbis will be more implementable on all kinds of hardware.

    Yawn, because it took so long for it to happen. Come on. Fixed point is not exactly difficult to deal with. Why didn't we see it sooner?

    1. Re:Yay! And Yawn! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they wanted to make money from it.

      Where's your fixed-pointer decoder, again?

    2. Re:Yay! And Yawn! by pclminion · · Score: 2

      Well, that isn't exactly what I meant. I meant why haven't hardware manufacturers done this themselves? Why did they have to wait for Vorbis to do it?

    3. Re:Yay! And Yawn! by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 3

      Because writing a fixed-point decoder without the spec (which only came out recently) is pretty difficult.

  40. Nice try, but wrong by FreeUser · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    You might not like it, but it's much more ideal (to the company) than GPL, and for most licensees it's just as good. In fact, the only people that don't like it are GPL zealots.

    GPL 'zealots' as you so snidely call them (but, of course, its Microsoft entusiasts, isn't it?), and just about anyone who is interested in contributing their time and energy to products.

    The communities which form up around Apple, Netscape, Microsoft, and Sun's licenses are positively anemic compared to the communities which have sprung up around both the BSD and GPLed licensed projects. Why? Because they give the users and the volunteer developers the least amount of freedom, and no guarantee that their work won't simply be seized from them (indeed, they generally rather state the opposite).

    You are correct, I don't like it. Nor do the vast majority of volunteer developers and users, so much os that Mozilla changed its licensing scheme in order to attract developers (and succeeded by the way), as did Sun with their GPLed release of Open Office.

    Does that make me a GPL zealot? Probably by your definition, since your definition appears to imply anyone not actively trying to malign the GPL is by definition a zealot. However, as one who publicly embraces numerous free licenses, including the BSD license and the GPL, I think I, and most free software enthusiasts, fall well outside of what both the dictionary and the average person would define as a "zealot."

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    1. Re:Nice try, but wrong by MisterBlister · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      Does that make me a GPL zealot?

      Shut up you stupid commie fag!

  41. Re:How long has the for-pay version been around? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Called a Troll? Sigh.

  42. No FPU on Arm machines. by The_Dougster · · Score: 1
    I have a Netwinder 2100 which has the StrongARM SA110 running at 275 MHz. It doesn't have a FPU, and neither does the Zaurus, although it does have some kind of MMU unit and the Zaurus might as well. I'm planning on getting a Zaurus anyways. The fact of the matter is that probably none of these Pocket PC's are going to have one, at least the Arm variants.

    Luckily the arm linux kernel has pretty good FPU emulation. You can either choose the industrial strength double precision model, or the somewhat experimental Acorn Fast FPU emulator. I personally use the double precision one on my Netwinder.

    Anyways, it really doesn't affect the general performance too much. The integer math is very fast and most Zaurus apps are tuned to use the integer ops just like this Vorbis decoder. I know the Netwinder is plenty fast for web surfing, and it makes a great firewall/router/server box. It runs X very snappy at 1024x768 and the Zaurus only has to contend with 320x200 and not even full XFree86 but QTopia instead.

    If you really need a FPU you should probably look into some kind of sub-notebook instead of a pocket pc, or just run your number crunching app remotely through the docking station :-)

    --
    Clickety Click ...
    1. Re:No FPU on Arm machines. by andrewm · · Score: 1

      My fixed point math routines are WAY faster than the ARM floating point emulator (FPE).

      http://isoar.ca/~andrewm/prog.html

      The FPE is very slow, so even --soft-float is faster. My fixed point routines leave them both in the dust :)

  43. Re:How fast a microprocessor/controller??? by tomstdenis · · Score: 2, Funny

    Why is this interesting? Hey moderators wake the heck up.

    An 8051 is a trivial old-school 8-bit MCU that doesn't even have a fast enough clockrate to handle the throughput let alone the data itself. Not to mention it has one 8-bit register, 128 bytes of ram and virtually no support for DSP math.

    Might as well have asked if you could implement it on a 4004 or something!

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  44. I'm not going to change my hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    every time some new compression comes along, otherwise I'll be putting a new CD player in my car every year.

  45. uh, come again? by British · · Score: 1, Troll

    A lot of us want portable music players with Vorbis support, right?

    Uh, no, seeing is that I haven't heard of Vorbis until now.

    Might as well ask "A lot of us want full SVG support on our Vectrex game consoles, right?"

    1. Re:uh, come again? by damiam · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wait... let me get this straight. You read /., and you haven't heard of Vorbis?

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  46. Re:theKompany is screwed (not) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - I love your player on the zaurus
    clean interface and good sound and
    with the ogg support I can throw
    plenty of songs on the couple of 128
    meg CFs I have around.

    The only downside compared to the Zaurus' media
    player is that the volume control is no longer easy to get at -

    - I have my portable OGG player and am damned happy with it-

    Paul Ellis
    ellis@cantrip.net

  47. Please donate! qjkx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I gave $16 (yeah small) without even intending to use it (I prefer non-lossy compression). I just want to promote free software.

  48. Performance? by jeffmock · · Score: 1

    Evidently this was written for a 200MHz strongARM.
    Does anyone how much of the CPU is required on
    a Zaurus? More specifically, will it run on the
    74MHz Cirrus ARM7 used in the Rio600, Rio Receiver,
    etc.

    jeff

    1. Re:Performance? by xiphmont · · Score: 5, Informative

      The original target for Tremor was a 74MHz Cirrus Maverick (ARM 7 TDMI core).

      Monty

  49. Riovolt sp250. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just sent a commecnt to the customer service part of sonicblue's website asking them to add ogg vorbis support for the sp250. I sure hope they consider doing it. I really like the ogg file format it's much better than mp3, the only reason I'm not using it right now is because my sp250 can't play oggs.

    1. Re:Riovolt sp250. by mcspock · · Score: 1

      i'm fairly certain the riovolt player was written by iriver, which i know has been looking at getting ogg support for a while. no clue as to whether or not sonicblue will actually pay them to make an update with ogg support.

      --
      -- Patience is a virtue, but impatience is an art.
  50. Well, integerized moving point, actually... by xiphmont · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Strictly speaking, this isn't 'fixed-point' although it is all integer. It uses primarily fixed point, but in the deep S/N vector paths, it uses integerized movable point in a way that most embedded architectures can do the shifts for free during ALU load (eg, look at the ARM assembly for the shift/multiplies). Have a look at the Vorbis codec spec on xiph.org if you want to know why this is necessary.

    Also, this code's been around for a while... we're releasing it for free now as commercial code has a short shelf life. It ran through it's commercial usefulness, and now we want it to be commodity code.

    Monty

    1. Re:Well, integerized moving point, actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you think your 'moving point' would work for an LD-CELP decoder? Specifically, Real Audio version 2?

  51. Oooh, I'm cranky and haven't had my coffee yet by xiphmont · · Score: 4, Funny
    >> A lot of us want portable music players with Vorbis support, right?

    > Uh, no, seeing is that I haven't heard of Vorbis until now.

    Mmm, this begs one of a few responses:

    1) "Gee, you don't care. That's nice. You must be talking to hear yourself talk, then."

    2) "Really? I'll tell you what Ogg is if you explain to me why I was supposed to get all excited about Jessica Simpson."

    3) "[rolls eyes] Not need respond to rhetorical question, Grog."

    4) "Quick! There's another parade to rain on over there! Hurry up, you'll miss it!"

    Monty

    "All in good fun until someone loses an eye. Then we're talking serious fun."

    1. Re:Oooh, I'm cranky and haven't had my coffee yet by Cryptnotic · · Score: 2
      2) "Really? I'll tell you what Ogg is if you explain to me why I was supposed to get all excited about Jessica Simpson."


      You're supposed to want to bone her, if only to make her stop singing. Instead of singing, imagine her moaning during your boning of her. Use your imagination.

      Anyway, no need to explain Ogg to me, I already understand it.

      --
      My other first post is car post.
    2. Re:Oooh, I'm cranky and haven't had my coffee yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this begs one of a few responses

      What the hell? Is that even valid english? It's like you started off by using "begs the question" improperly, and then mutilated it, possibly by running over it with a car several times.

      I mean seriously, what exactly does it beg those responses for? Besides, it's not even a tangible object, let alone sentient, so how could it beg at all?

    3. Re:Oooh, I'm cranky and haven't had my coffee yet by Ziviyr · · Score: 1

      Monty has gone karma whore on us.

      Oh well, he can puree kittens as long as Vorbis sees progress (just my oppinion).

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
  52. Re:How fast a microprocessor/controller??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey Moderators, wake UP! Tom has a good point. The 8051 was originally used in keyboards. Still is to the best of my knowledge. That is a very slow data rate. So no, tom's point is not funny, but factual. And I might add, more clued in.

  53. Re: Yawn! by don.g · · Score: 1

    Tremor has been available for some time, just not under a BSD license.

    --
    Pretend that something especially witty is here. Thanks.
  54. Yes, yes, there have. Try leaving the cave. by xiphmont · · Score: 5, Informative
    Your point would in fact be insightful (that only the quality matters, and quality is a hard problem) if you had looked around for a few tests first.

    Start here: Hydrogen Audio

    No, that's not us (Although we like them as they're likely the least bullshit-laden codec comparison and development bulletin board out there. These guys were *very* harsh about Vorbis's quality the first few years. That feedback was invaluable for making the codec as good as it is today.)

    c't has also run tests including Vorbis, and will have a big test run on several thousand listeners to offer here sometime soon. It's basically a much larger version of the tests ff123 has run on Hydrogen Audio. We're not privy to any of the current results, but I expect we'll do just fine ;-)

    As for 'cranking it out', Ogg development started in 1993.

    Monty

  55. ARM lib by johnjones · · Score: 2

    yeah great how about a lib that is for the ARM arch
    this is how the windows media gets in most players

    then we are talking

    Ipod - ARM7 based (with hardware layer 3 MPEG)
    rio (new) - ARM7 based
    empeg - StrongARM based

    talk to cirrus and do a Lib that is ansi c and can be compiled with SDT 2.X and ADS

    oh yeah and if it was MIPS based we would have no problems but hey here's wishing (-;

    regards

    John '64bit for ieee754' Jones

    1. Re:ARM lib by Sesse · · Score: 1

      Go read the README. It's written in ANSI C, with minor assembly optimizations for the ARM. :-) /* Steinar */

      --
      (This comment is of course GPLed.)
  56. Re:How fast a microprocessor/controller??? by robslimo · · Score: 1

    I believe you can get a fast FPGA with an 8051 core; program up some interface logic... ...but you'd probably be banging your head, even if you succeed. Hell, back in the turbo XT days some guys built an 8086 compatible processor out of ECL discretes and bit-slice processors that ran at 100 MHz. But why?

  57. Re:theKompany is screwed (not) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    all you have to do is be on the graphic equalizer display screen and then you can use the hardware cursor button to change volume, tracks and pause/resume. It's all in the manual.

    glad you like the app :).

    Shawn Gordon
    President
    theKompany.com

  58. Rasterman's new toy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Evas2 is the new image libray that effects embedded chips while handling certain details look at his news section as he has snapshots of what evas can do on his pda...www.rasterman.com

  59. Isn't this odd. by Zathruss · · Score: 1


    I use ogg exclusively over mp3, and love it to bits, and will continue to use it as long as it rocks.
    </disclaimer>

    That said, I find it a little strange that this announcement of the free specialized ogg decoder comes right after Fraunhoffer(sp?) got hauled over the coals for charging for theirs....

    If that is a tactic on the part of the Xiph guys, I'd say its not needed, as ogg is clearly better IMO.

    1. Re:Isn't this odd. by volsung · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Actually, no one cares if Fraunhofer (actually Thomson is the one managing the money end) charges for their decoder software since almost no one uses it anyway. On the other hand, people are a little perturbed that you still have to pay Thomson for a patent license even if you write your own decoder.

      This is not the case with Vorbis. Xiph.org decided to charge for Tremor in the past, but there never was (and never will be) any restrictions on third-party encoders/decoders. Another person wrote a free integerized Vorbis decoder while Tremor was still proprietary, (though there were some concerns at the time about whether the decoder would produce output equivalent to the floating-point decoder). The Vorbis format is completely open and not hindered by patents, whereas Vorbis software can be licensed however the author wishes.

    2. Re:Isn't this odd. by Ziviyr · · Score: 1

      If that is a tactic on the part of the Xiph guys, I'd say its not needed, as ogg is clearly better IMO.

      Yeah, but Vorbis clearly needs some portable players IMO.

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
    3. Re:Isn't this odd. by Zathruss · · Score: 1

      My point, though I admit it wasn't all that clear, was that hardware players were inevitable. As long as there are people who care about: 1) audio quality, and 2) free standards; its just a matter of time. Its a case of: "come, and they will build it."

    4. Re:Isn't this odd. by Ziviyr · · Score: 1

      Last week I dropped the $90 I had waiting for a decent MP3 CD player (I couldn't find one up to my standards) on the "Dvorty" keyboard that I'm cutting my teeth on now.

      If an OGG CD player was out there, I would have given it a very hard look.

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
  60. Whoa there... chill out, buddy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chill out, man, he was asking an honest question. He didn't ask to get modded up, he was just curious and asked a legitimate question. No sense in shouting and berating him.

    1. Re:Whoa there... chill out, buddy by dmiller · · Score: 2

      A question which could have been answered in 10 seconds by Google.

    2. Re:Whoa there... chill out, buddy by cakoose · · Score: 1

      10 seconds?

      Results 1 - 10 of about 526. Search took 0.13 seconds. :)

  61. please contact the manufacturer by halfelven · · Score: 1

    If you own a hardware MP3 player, please contact the manufacturer (see URLs in the article).
    I own a Rio and i already sent e-mails to SonicBlue. Please do the same thing. Otherwise nothing will change.

  62. not quite by halfelven · · Score: 1

    That's why we need the manufacturers to support Vorbis.
    For example, my Rio Volt 250 is upgradeable via software: you go to their site, download a file, burn it in a CD, put the CD in the player and turn it on. Voila! It's upgraded.
    This simple process could be used to make the player Vorbis-aware, of course if the manufacturer is ever going to support it.
    The same could happen to your hardware player: get the update, flash it up and that's it - you now have the same hardware playing Vorbis in addition to MP3. There's no need to upgrade the actual hardware for that.

  63. same here by halfelven · · Score: 1

    (see subj.)

  64. Re:How fast a microprocessor/controller??? by Hugonz · · Score: 1
    If you read carefully, I wrote "say, an 8051".

    I was not even stating this uC is any good. The original question was HOW POWERFUL does a Microprocessor need to be in order to decompress OGG, ok?

    A microprocessor suggestion would be nice.

  65. Strange things are happening ... by DVega · · Score: 3, Informative

    On May 04, Nicolas Pitre released a free (GPL) fixed point vorbis decoder and announced it on Vorbis Developement list.

    But this important contribution was kept in silence. Even all posts from May 2002 had mysteriously dissapeared from Vorbis-dev archive.

    Fortunately a copy of Nicolas announcement could be find here.

    Now Xiph.org anounces that its fixed-point implementation is available for free under BSD style license.

    This seems very strange to me.

    --
    MOD THE CHILD UP!
    1. Re:Strange things are happening ... by xiphmont · · Score: 5, Informative

      The mail archives didn't disappear; they were never there. I made a permissions error in the archive spool after fixing a log rotation bug :-( None of May was logged.

      The previous non-Xiph fixed-point decoder releases are derived from a flawed 'good enough for now' port of Vorbis to the HipZip originally done by iObjects/Fullplay. This port was a quick integerization of beta 3 done in late 2000 and has signal depth problems. It does not decode later-than-beta-4 files. Even if updated to full 1.0, it will still have dynamic range problems when playing 1.0 and later bitstreams.

      Tremor was originally done as a report to ARM at the request of Fullplay after determining that starting from scratch was easier than repairing the existing beta-3-derived code. Fullplay opted not to purchase the new port, and eventually released their own beta-3 port under GPL on SourceForge. Those who then derived their own versions from the SourceForge project were generally aware that this was an incomplete 'good enough for now' version and that the code would eventually hit bitstreams that it couldn't play well or at all.

      Now that Tremor is BSD, there's no reason to keep using derivations of this old beta-3 port.

      Nothing strange about it. You can go back to chasing government UFO conspiracies now....

      Monty

    2. Re:Strange things are happening ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Might it be that Pitre decided in cooperation with xiph.org that the code should be licensed as BSD?

    3. Re:Strange things are happening ... by jelle · · Score: 3, Informative

      I've got a full mail archive of vorbis (8520 mails) and vorbis-dev (5506 mails) since aug 25 2000 in my mailbox.

      Interested to fix your archive?

      --
      --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
    4. Re:Strange things are happening ... by mibus · · Score: 1

      There was a fixed-point vorbis decoder aaages ago (May 2002) that does work on post beta4 files. (I used it today on some 1.0 files :)

      From the sounds of the email (to handhelds.org ipaq-list) it's mostly just a "port" of the floating-point version.

      IIRC there's a copy in the GPE CVS (gpe.handhelds.org).

      I can't vouch for it's "real" quality but I use it with about 3hrs of -1 quality files (on my iPAQ) and it sounds just fine through the headphones.

  66. look around the site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  67. Which vorbis is faster on Intel? by iabervon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is the original libvorbis faster (due to making productive use of the FPU), or is the new integer math one faster (because floating point is pretty slow in general)? I'd guess that libvorbis is better on Intel and tremor is better on non-Intel x86 (due to the relative strengths of different vendors), but it's hard to say. Has anyone actually benchmarked them? libvorbis is a noticeable load on one of the machiens I use, so it would be worth switching if it would help.

    1. Re:Which vorbis is faster on Intel? by aderusha · · Score: 1

      i don't have any benchmarks, but i'd imagine that the FP version is still much faster than the integer version. there's a lot of small devices that can decode mp3's using a non-floating point decoder on cheap hardware, and it's the primary reason that many soft-upgradable devices haven't had vorbis support in the past. decoding mp3's and vorbis files without an FP unit requires doing a lot of manual conversions in the code, bloating the code out.

      ----------
      the phatnoise music box (and now kenwood music keg) runs linux on non-fp hardware, and as such cannot handle vorbis - until now?

      new pentium 4 mp3 decoder performs much better due to intel's new floating point conversion opcodes

    2. Re:Which vorbis is faster on Intel? by Skuto · · Score: 2

      >I'd guess that libvorbis is better on Intel and
      >tremor is better on non-Intel x86 (due to the
      >relative strengths of different vendors),

      Apparently, Tremor is faster on the K6. For the Pentium Pro and related architectures (P2/P3/Celeron), and the Athlon, the floating point decoder is faster.

      --
      GCP

  68. ot: fuck rca lyra by cosyne · · Score: 2

    So admittedly this is a bit off topic, but, having been frustrated with my RCA lyra for 2 years now (esp. 'cause i got it as a gift so i feel bad selling it on ebay, but owning it makes it hard to justify buying a real player), i thought "schweet. soon i can get an ogg codec for it, and maybe it won't be like their proprietary brain-damaged MPX format which is like MP3 but 'unpiratable' and requires a particular CF device and software to load onto the card." Well, lyrazone.com has links for an mp3pro codec, wma, etc, but no mention of an ogg codec. Ok, it's a little early for that, it did just come out after all. But there's no way to contact them to inquire about ogg support, request it, etc. Not even in help. Not even in help help.

    So the short story is, if i can prevent anyone from buying an rca lyra, please allow me to do so. Their product sucks, their customer service more, and i'll be surprised if they release a vorbis codec which could possibly redeem the lyra.

    ok. done ranting. mod at will.

  69. Re:How fast a microprocessor/controller??? by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2

    Actually, many hardware MP3 players use CPUs similar to this. All they have to do is pull data off an IDE bus and feed it to a MAS3057 MPEG decoder chip - not exactly tricky.

    You're partially right, of course. You couldn't implement a software decoder on an 8051. Well, you could, just not in real-time.

  70. Soon you can learn languages on the go! by retostamm · · Score: 1
    I have not seen many apps that actually create or come with gpl'd .ogg files (except rippers etc.).

    I am thinking there should be more content like

    <shameless plug>
    LingoTeach, a free language teaching tool that comes with 800 recorded sample pronounciations, and teaches English, German, Spanish and Chinese.

    LingoTeach will soon create your own customized language tape or CD. So if you had a portable .ogg player, you could listen to GPL content on the go!
    </shameless plug>

    Now go and ask Apple for an iPod with Oggs!

  71. Mod parent up, please by Adam+J.+Richter · · Score: 2
    Results of a blind test of ogg vs. mp3 are very useful, even (and especially) if the outcome is disappointing.

    Thank you, afidel, for trying to conduct some reasonably objective tests and posting the results.

  72. Paypal slashdotted by linuxguy · · Score: 1

    I have been trying to donate some money for the past 30 minutes with no luck. This is what I keep getting

    ------------
    An error has occurred.

    Because we are currently experiencing heavy traffic to our site, we were unable to complete your request. Try clicking the 'Refresh' button on your browser. If you are still unable to access the site, please try again later.

    We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause and appreciate your patience.

    Error 3004
    ---------

    I guess its a good thing. Too many slashdotters donating to a good cause?

    1. Re:Paypal slashdotted by Ziviyr · · Score: 1

      Ooooooooooh!

      Is /. responsible for that?

      Got enough donations to streamline Tarkin development yet? :-)

      --

      Someone set us up the bomb, so shine we are!
  73. This could be implemented into a trumpion cpu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    T33510
    (MP3 microcontroller)

    Trumpion Microelectronics Inc.(TMI) announces a new microcontroller, named T33510, which can be used in the applications of MP3 player, Flash Card Reader/Writer or USB to IDE converter. T33510 includes a popular 8051 CPU and is easy firmware development by ICE. This microcontroller uses 0.5um/3.3V process and its CPU speed has 3 frequencies, 6/12/24MHz, to be selected for low power consumption and high speed data transfer. The micocontroller has 32 general IO ports with extra address and data bus to access the user definded program (ROM code).

    For MP3 applications, T33510 has a particular hardware to support SmartMedia card, SmartMedia flash memory and CompactFlash card so that the whole MP3 system can has a very impressive performance. Furthermore, a MP3 bit-stream generator to connect with an external MP3 decoder, like Micronas, ST or Samsung, is also designed in T33510 to reduce the firmware efforts of the MPEG-AUDIO playing. The USB and LPT port are all avalible to be used as the download or upload way between the PC and Flash Card or memory. The speed of the data transfer of T33510 for USB can reach to 600 Kbytes/second, and for LPT can reach to 200 Kbytes/second.

    For Flash Card Reader/Writer, Trumpion has designed a swappable DMA buffer (2 of 528bytes) in T33510 for speed acceleration of data transfer. This design can read and write data simultaneously, and significantly shorten the time of downloading a film from card to PC or printer. Especially for Smartmedia card or flash the T33510 has a ECC hardware to solve the error correction issue. The USB inside the T33510 is a high speed and easy configuration design for USB to IDE convertion.

    For most of USB CD-ROM or hard-driver, T33510 already has provided a good and cheap solution. Trumpion believe they can guarantee their customer a lowest BOM while offers a high quality micocontroller for MP3/Card RW/USBtoIDE applications. By the way, Trumpion also can provide their customer free source codes of the demo firmware and PC drivers to make customer success.

  74. vorbis vs. mp3 by David+Jao · · Score: 2
    Have there been any REAL double-blind tests as well as equipment tests of quality comparisons between MP3 and Ogg Vorbis yet?

    In general, your point is sound, but in this case you picked a really bad example. With mp3, it's not even close: vorbis wins in a landslide, especially at low bitrates.

    Just take literally any sound file and encode it at 64 kbps vorbis vs. 64 kbps mp3, and listen to it once. The double blind concept isn't even useful here because the mp3 sounds so much worse than the vorbis that anyone can instantly tell which is which, rendering the blind useless.

    Whether the same holds at high bitrates, or with other formats, is a different question, one which is well served by a blind test. Others have already pointed out some links to such tests. But in many situations the advantages of vorbis, especially over mp3, are so obvious that the concept of blind testing is not even applicable.

  75. tkcOggRipper: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this product final? There are RPM's, but you say that Windows is supported, yet there is no obvious binary? There is the 5MB oggripper without an extension, but nothing else.

    The program looks great, what I have been waiting for. Something that does Vorbis, does it terribly easy, and also uses cdparanoia.

    the ability to custom tag would be nice, but I can't see if that ability exists or not (judging from screenshots, no).

    1. Re:tkcOggRipper: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something that does Vorbis, does it terribly easy, and also uses cdparanoia.

      What, like CDex and Grip have been doing for over a year now? Man, that'd be sweet...

  76. Handspring Visor Version? by libertynews · · Score: 2

    Well gee, now I can do a port to the SM2496 module for the Visor. Oh, wait... Handspring has killed the Springboard market. Nevermind.

    --
    Remember Lexington Green!
  77. Good point, NEX II has no copyright crap.... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    To all the bofings salivating for Ipod: NEX II does not have any copyright idiocity.

    It can be connected as an external USB hard drive, you can put pretty much whatever you want in the CF card (up to 1GB if you use IBM's microdisk). No movable parts if you use memory cards. Ideal as a replacement for ZIP drives if what you need is to transport moderate ammounts (64MB,128MB!) of data.

    Then get yourself a camera that uses CF and you can use the same cards for it as well.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  78. stick it in the hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...for OGG to really attack the MP3 player market
    the decoder needs to be available as a simple
    chip , just like the MP3 decoder chips.

  79. Re:How fast a microprocessor/controller??? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

    8048's were used in keyboards weren't they?

    Tom

    --
    Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  80. Send an email! It helps! by tweakt · · Score: 2
    I received this reply:
    Dear Sir,

    Thank you for your suggestion. We will definitely look into the Ogg Vorbis format for the NEX II player.

    Thank you.

    Customer Support
    Frontier Labs.
  81. Mail archive by Deven · · Score: 1

    I've got a full mail archive of vorbis (8520 mails) and vorbis-dev (5506 mails) since aug 25 2000 in my mailbox.

    Interested to fix your archive?


    Well, anyone keeping an archive usually wants it to be complete, so he'd probably be interested -- why don't you email Monty directly at monty@xiph.org with your offer? (He might not notice your offer here...)

    --

    Deven

    "Simple things should be simple, and complex things should be possible." - Alan Kay

  82. Where, where are they? by Wraithlyn · · Score: 2

    Your post would in fact be informative if the link had pointed somewhere relevant.

    The Hydrogen Audio link you gave just redirects to a message board at audio-illumination.org. Now I didn't go through every post with a magnifying glass or anything, but I did look around a bit, and didn't see any listening tests in any sort of prominent location. Care to comment?

    --
    "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
  83. A dupe? how so /. ? could you be a little louder ? by buswolley · · Score: 1

    on the erroR? what do you mean dupe?

    --

    A Good Troll is better than a Bad Human.

  84. Ogg on Archos Jukebox by Antity · · Score: 2

    No.

    According to some documents I read about the Archos Jukebox devices over the last days, it seems that Ogg playback is impossible on them.

    Why? They contain a CPU to do the graphics and some other stuff and a hard-programmed DSP that is doing MP3->Audio conversion.

    Even if you would be able to use the fixed-point Ogg code, it would have to be re-converted to MP3 or the DSP won't be able to play it. It only plays MP3.

    And have a look at the fixed-point code. It contains lots of tables. This is quite much of RAM requirement.

    --
    42. Easy. What is 32 + 8 + 2?
    1. Re: Ogg on Archos Jukebox by Antity · · Score: 2

      (btw most of the information I gathered was from the Rockbox site &&|| mailing list)

      Another thing: There was an article explaining that even *if* you could make the DSP play "raw" decoded sound, the serial interface between CPU and DSP would just not be fast enough to transfer this amount of data.

      --
      42. Easy. What is 32 + 8 + 2?
  85. Audio double-blind test by Antity · · Score: 2

    Have there been any REAL double-blind tests as well as equipment tests of quality comparisons between MP3 and Ogg Vorbis yet? They never seem to get done.

    Heise was just doing this (German) at the moment (ended August 29th). Public double-blind test.

    Featuring:

    • MP3 (of course)
    • MPEG4-AAC
    • MP3Pro
    • Ogg Vorbis
    • Windows Media Audio
    • RealAudio

    Watch out for results, which are being published (according to the web page) in c't magazine 19/2002 (out 2002-09-09).

    --
    42. Easy. What is 32 + 8 + 2?
  86. What's up with that? by Sunnan · · Score: 1

    Sure, tremor sounds great and use it for the player, nice, but what's wrong with Ogg? It sounds great, use it, it'll become more catchy with time.