Slashdot Mirror


Hydrogenaudio Closes Doors For Now

verloren writes "The Admins at Hydrogenaudio, the community site discussing audio compression and related issues, have temporarily closed the site. They've posted a notice stating that they're rethinking the standards of the community, and how they're enforced. It seems to have been sparked most recently by a debate over what media players to use, but has been brewing for some time as the objective standards required at the site have been overlooked by many posters. The sister sites Foobar2000 and Rarewares are still available."

118 comments

  1. Its the same old story. by torpor · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Talking about what code to write never works. The rule is:

    He who writes the code, gets to say what to do with that code.

    Hydrogenaudio was noble, but misplaced. What is needed, simply, is less talk and more action on the codec front.

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    1. Re:Its the same old story. by millette · · Score: 1

      Could you explain a little more? It's not like slashdot is getting any real work done, yet we all agree we couldn't live without it, right?

      Seriously, sometimes it's time to think, and sometimes it's time for action. You mean now is definately not a time to think? (Pardon the messed up quote from Candy, I think..)

    2. Re:Its the same old story. by torpor · · Score: 1

      Ermm... comparing slashdot to this situation is a little oblique. slashdot members aren't trying to accomodate a public need for open media formats.

      What I mean is, code is what counts.

      If any of the competing factions had actually gotten working code *done*, and being used by actual humans to solve the media file-format problems, then there probably wouldn't have been this demise to report ...

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    3. Re:Its the same old story. by Compact+Dick · · Score: 1

      If I am parsing your cryptic comments right, it is your comments that are misplaced. Hydrogenaudio is not a company developing an audio codec, but they test, evaluate and compare various codecs for quality.

    4. Re:Its the same old story. by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'd be much better off without it. Probably'd get more work done, drive a nicer car, AND be better in bed. I'd taste great and be less filling without slashdot, too!

      Actually, I've been here less and less lately. This place is too aggressive, and I'm finding that when I DO go to get real work done on other message boards, I end up thrashing someone with a slashdot-style diatrabe(diatribe? Diettrade? Sally Struthers?), and nobody wants that.

      Maybe the trolls.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    5. Re:Its the same old story. by millette · · Score: 1
      "What I mean is, code is what counts."
      That reminds me - I'm reading Extreme Programming Refactored (I probably shouldn't open that door) and it made me realize how that attitude is primordial to XP.
  2. Maybe... by Op7imus_Prim3 · · Score: 0, Funny

    They were pre-empting the slashdot effect.

  3. You Fools! by tangent3 · · Score: 2, Funny

    New problems, such as the rising cost of reliable high speed hosting...

    I think that has just became an even bigger problem!

  4. Forced? by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 0

    We regret that we cannot be more specific about some of these points or that we cannot give a necessarily clear idea about how and when they addressed. We do, however, encourage people who are concerned or have something to offer to contact us for discussion.

    This smells fishy to me... almost sounds like the NSA shut them down ;)

    But seriously, can someone shed some light on the whole thing?

    --
    .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    1. Re:Forced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There was always one big issue: (unintentional) bias

      When testing audio codecs it's important to do a double blind test. (On HA they would call it "ABX", I think that was because that's the name of the program)
      The easiest way to do it is to give a program the source file and the encoded version.
      (Or two encoded files with diffrent codecs, depending on what you wanted to accomplish.
      For transparency, ie can you tell the diffrence between a MP3 encoded with X options and the source file?, you would give source and encoded.
      For comparison between 64 K Vorbis and WMA youi give two of those files)
      The program would play them 8 times (or so), first one then the other, but you can't know which file is which since it would alternate.
      You listen carefully and give it a score.

      At the end the program tells you which file you preferred.

      With psychoacoustic encoding that's the whole deal: you want to encode the file in such a way that for a human it seems as close to the original as possible.
      Because of bias, a double blind test is THE ONLY way to accurately rate lossy encoders

      But the newbies would come and say:
      Hey this codec is better then that codec.
      How do you know?
      It sounds better
      Have you done a ABX?
      No, but my ears are golden

      Or they would come:
      I compared a graph of the source with the encoded file and this codec produces files that seem the most identical.

      Both of these are totally wrong, and sometimes you would have dudes that would insist that one of these methods are good, no matter how much you try to talk some sense into them.

      And another problem: misinformed audiophiles
      "Oh no the stereo image is holy, joint-stereo is from the devil!"
      Never mind that LAME has an excellent joint-stereo system.
      And they would come with other crazy theories, for example challenging Shannon's theory that to encode a X Hz signal you only need 2X of bandiwdth.

      So that's a part of it

    2. Re:Forced? by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Thanks for the info :)

      I'm quite familiar with the technology (I make music and have coded some DSP), but I didn't realize what all the fuss was about.

      --
      .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
    3. Re:Forced? by orthogonal · · Score: 1

      And another problem: misinformed audiophiles
      "Oh no the stereo image is holy, joint-stereo is from the devil!"


      Maybe I'm misinformed too, but I thought stereo meant recording seperate numbers for each channel, and joint stereo meant recording a number for one channel and a delta for the other channel(s), and that one could be trivially converted to the other.

      The benefit (as I understood it) of joint stereo was that the delta was usually of smaller magnitude, and thus had a smaller range and more repeats of the same numbers, making Huffman encoding of the deltas more efficient.

      What am I missing? Are stereo and joint-stereo not simple isomorphisms?

    4. Re:Forced? by CaptainPhong · · Score: 1

      Yes you are right, that is the benefit of joint-stereo and they are (in theory) equivalent. On some sections (were there , it turns out to not be an advantage, so a smart encoder uses a mix of joint stereo and full L/R frames. This is what Lame does.

      In practice, it also lets you can also quantize channels differently (whether they're left/right or mid/side) to improve compression/quality so in a lossy codec so the two versions aren't guaranteed to be bit-for-bit identical. In a really crappy/bugged encoder, doing this badly can damage a file audibly, but that's true of many things in crappy encoders. Lame uses joint-stereo correctly and doesn't damage the audio. The result is that joint-stereo in Lame produces smaller files and/or better quality.

      --
      ... "Give me a woman who loves beer and I will conquer the w
    5. Re:Forced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah I simplified my post a bit.

      There are two kinds of join-stereo.
      First we have L/R, (normal stereo)
      And (1) Mid side joint stereo(you call the side delta).
      M = L+R
      S = L-R
      So we get back, L= M+S/2, R = M-S/2
      Using mid-side is lossless, and the main reason we do it is not to save bits actually but to accountfor some stereo unmasking problems that can arise.
      Although it can save some bits.
      (The only minor problem is that because you divide by 2 you can get rounding errors, but lossy encoding is full of potential rounding errors and the good codecs (like LAME) are very good at preventing that and deciding when normal stereo or mid-side should be used)

      However there is another joint-stereo:
      Intensity Stereo.
      It assumes L and R are the same but with diffrent intensities.
      With most music L and R are the same (most of the time) with diffrent intensities and phase!
      And intensity stereo doesn't take phase diffrence into account.

      However LAME didn't have intensity stereo for a long time.
      It does have it now, but it is only enabled automatically at 96 kbps and lower, and you can always disable it(although at those bitrates it is better to do intensity stereo).

      So these audiophiles were often misinformed, since other mp3 encoders used intenisty stereo they thought LAME did too.

      Now back to mid-side:
      Sometimes mid-side is better (if the channels are very identical) other times normal stereo is better (if the channels are very diffrent).
      LAME is excellent in determing which strategy is best for a given sample.

      In theory MS (Mid-side) and NS (normal stereo) are simple isomorphisms, however when doing lossy compression you want to use the one that is most efficient, so that the rest of your bits can be used for the 'resolution' of your signal, if you will.

      If the two channels differ too much, MS will use more bits then NS, leaving less bandwidth for your signal if you use it.
      In the other case NS will lower your bandwidth since MS uses less bits.

      So some people presumed that joint-stereo always uses MS and so they said that joint-stereo is evil.
      However for most music using only MS is just as inefficient as using only NS, it's just that these guys thought that NS could never go wrong, but they were wrong.

      The best option is to use joint stereo and let LAME decide where to use MS and where to use NS.

    6. Re:Forced? by Gumshoe · · Score: 1
      And they would come with other crazy theories, for example challenging Shannon's theory that to encode a X Hz signal you only need 2X of bandiwdth.


      Isn't that Nyquist's Theorum rather than Shannon's?
    7. Re:Forced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      for example challenging Shannon's theory that to encode a X Hz signal you only need 2X of bandwidth.

      I'd like to correct one perception, here, in that an X Hz signal can only be reconstructed from 2X of bandwidth when:

      1) The original signal is band-limited to X Hz. I.e. a signal that is X+y does not have from 0 to X reconstructed, and X to X+y lost. It has frequencies corrupted.

      2) Full reconstruction requires ideal, unbuildable components. You can't get that in practice across any part of the spectrum, but for sampling at 2X Hz it gets very difficult to even nearly-preserve signal near X Hz. You need about 10% margin in very high-end applications (I've worked on military DSP) to about 20% in consumer products.

    8. Re:Forced? by JebusIsLord · · Score: 1

      ABX is called thusly because you are comparing samples A and B to randomly selected sample X, to see if you can really blindly tell the difference between the two.

      --
      Jeremy
    9. Re:Forced? by JebusIsLord · · Score: 1

      LAME still doesn't do intensity stereo, actually. Only joint. That's why even the LAME devs suggest using FhG for really low bitrates in stereo.

      --
      Jeremy
    10. Re:Forced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As of around LAME 3.90 (I don't know which one) LAME does have support for intensity stereo, and at bitrates lower 96 K it will automatically use it.
      (though not all the time, depending on the bitrate, if there is room it will not use intensity stereo).

      Check the documentation.

      You can also enable it with "-m i".

      the LAME command line usage guide:
      http://lame.sourceforge.net/USAGE

      Search for "intensity" and you will automatically find the appropriate part of the guide.

  5. Re:the discussion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That certainly is not what lead to this. The "media player" discussion you're referring to was actually harmless compared to past happenings, it's outright ridiculous to assume that this is what lead to the shutdown.

  6. Re:The name is everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's also stupid because it's too damn geeky. Both words refer to people in Terry Pratchett books, and what the hell has that got to do with digital media? Typical nerd naming scheme if you ask me.

  7. Re:The name is everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    So you think "MP3" is more descriptive? Silly argument if you ask me.

    And, just for the record, Ogg is the container format, Vorbis is the codec. Vorbis can be used within Ogg, but also with other container formats as long as they provide enough information. The Vorbis-over-RTP draft is a good example of how this might work.

    Lourens

  8. never heard of it/standards rant by asv108 · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    So let me get this straight, a web site with no code or corporate involvement was hoping to create a standard for audio? What was this technology going to do differently than OGG? Don't we have enough lossy audio formats out there?

    Standards either evolve over time (mp3), are created by groups of large media companies (DVD, CD), and there are even a few technologies that accidently become a standard over time (Linux). Heck I think OGG and FLAC are just starting to show some of their promise in the form of device support. I'm busy rencoding my CD collection.

    People tend to forget that MP3 has been around since the EARLY 90's, it takes a long time for any technology to become a REAL standard.

    1. Re:never heard of it/standards rant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      So let me get this straight, a web site with no code or corporate involvement was hoping to create a standard for audio?

      No. Hydrogenaudio is an audio discussion board where development and testing of various audio formats/encoders and the foobar2000 player takes place, but this is not the main aspect of the board. It's just an informed community (well, mostly) that maintains a high standard of discussion (unlike this place).

      Which is why I wish this had never been posted here, now look at the mess and all the misinformation flowing here already... >:(

    2. Re:never heard of it/standards rant by Senior+Frac · · Score: 1

      The main article here was either so badly written, or so badly mangled by the editor, that I don't think the original point they were trying to make is salvagable. Give up folks. You'll never stop the Slashdot horde from righteous indignation at a corporate-type "controlling audio standards" on this one. To many post-only accounts, not enough read.

  9. $slackdot-joke by palad1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    echo $close($site)+$slashdoting($site->server) +" very effective"

    or am I too late already?

  10. Re:The name is everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You should really define the function as int main(int argc, char *argv[])

  11. Re:The name is everything by tangent3 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm not sure why parent wasn't modded as Off-Topic but Hydrogenaudio != Ogg Vorbis. Hydrogenaudio is a forum for discussion of audio compression, and isn't affiliated, although Ogg Vorbis is one of the favoured codecs (along with MPC, AAC and of course, MP3) and has its own dedicated forums.

    However, recently Ogg Vorbis has been falling out of favour because of some questions beinr brought up and currently still unanswered about the truth of the statement that Ogg Vorbis is "patent-free" because of a few patents uncovered recently which Ogg Vorbis may have infringed on. So far Xiph has not answered the questions to the satisfaction of the administrators of the forums... but I doubt all this is the main cause of the forum to suspend service, but maybe one of many. *shrug*

  12. Re:The name is everything by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    AAC wins on the name front if you call it MPEG-4 audio (or `mp4' for short), since people know about `mp3' already and will assume that an `mp4' is like an `mp3' only better.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  13. Re:Decent media players? by mantera · · Score: 0

    why isn't this off-topic... there's winamp 5 which is the best media player i've ever seen. And i did try quintessential player but it's pretty lame and mediocre.

  14. foobar2000 by Compact+Dick · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    One of the finest multi-format audio players, its simple looks belie its power, extensibility and ease of use. Give foobar2000 a whirl.

    Developed at Hydrogenaudio by Peter Pawlowski [of former Winamp fame] et al.

    1. Re:foobar2000 by millette · · Score: 1

      Sure... post right before I do so I get marked as redundant! Maybe next time you'll think about others before acting.

  15. some clarification about HA by technology+is+sexy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just a couple of things to make some things clear to the slashdot crowd:

    1. HydrogenAudio is/was the No. 1 place on the net regarding the development of audio codecs and other audio related tools. Think of it as "the bugtraq of audio". Several developers of open- and closedsource codecs participated regularly in the discussions and the community helped by providing blind test results (some of them appeared on slashdot even), problem-samples and ideas/general input. It was the center of development of the widely used lame --alt-presets, which brought a new level of quality to MP3 and the foobar2000 audio player.

    2. No legal problems whatsoever are connected to the closing down.

    3. HA is going to come back shortly (= some days).

  16. Re:the discussion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well I'm not assuming this - that's just what main post stated :> (have you read it?)
    Anyway, I'm still curious...

  17. Re:Decent media players? by millette · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Maybe you should give foobar2000 a try - it's from one of the winamp2 developpers, it's very unbloated, and supports all kinds of plugins and looks.

  18. Re:The name is everything by millette · · Score: 1

    Yeah, like "Media Player Classic" for example :)

  19. Re:Decent media players? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find Media Player Classic (available from http://www.kazaalite.tk in the codec packs) to be an excellent player, unique in its simplicity and usefulness.

  20. Re:The name is everything by rillian · · Score: 5, Informative

    However, recently Ogg Vorbis has been falling out of favour because of some questions beinr brought up and currently still unanswered about the truth of the statement that Ogg Vorbis is "patent-free" because of a few patents uncovered recently which Ogg Vorbis may have infringed on.

    To give air to the otherside of that flamewar, the 'unanswered' questions had more to do with a misunderstanding on the part of some forum members about how the patent system works in the US. "Patent-free" does not mean no one will sue you ever, because anyone can sue you anytime for anything. It's all about the negotiation of expectation for who would win at what cost in a potential legal action.

    In that context, and because we feel Xiph.org the organization is a likely target of punitive legal action, we unfortunately feel the less said about what we think about specific patents, the better, to avoid advertising routes of legal attack. Hardly the usual values of openness, but that's what the US legal system argues for.

    What Vorbis needs is independent defenders who understand the issues, not demands for justification from groups that should mostly be on the same side.

  21. common among many OSS projects by asv108 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Its really quite simple, developers tend to not understand basic principles of marketing, or in many cases understand that their names are obfuscated but want to keep with tradition of using obscure "geeky" project titles and acronyms. The best example is GNU, which hardly anyone can pronounce the first time anyway but then Stallman's insistence on using GNU/Linux. How many consumer products do you know with a / in their name? There is reason for tha to you know :) How many consumer products do you know of that use strage/recursive acronyms?

    Now many people will argue that if you code an OSS project you can name it whatever the fuck you want. This is very true and it suits me just fine but developers should start to consider their potential user base before naming a good software product with a title that most people can't understand or at least partially derive from product name what it does. Here is just a small list of products with bad names:

    • OGG, OGG Vorbis, or whatever you want to call it
    • MP3 (is this video?)
    • GNOME
    • Kanyhting
    • GNU/Linux

    Here are some names that are good or partially good:

    • FLAC (you can derive the purpose from the name)
    • Linux (Sounds like UNIX)
    • Audacity
    • X-Chat
    • Evolution
    1. Re:common among many OSS projects by Fermier+de+Pomme+de · · Score: 1
      MP3- MPEG Layer 3 - Motion Picture Experts Group. When this was coined it was not meant to a a product name for mass consumption, it was a spec and you can derive the purpose from the name. As with any acronym, you need to know what it stands for to have a chance. FLAC is clearer if you know the acronym but if not it is equally obscure.

      MP3 came into use partly because the format became the 'Kleenex' or 'Xerox' or 'Coke' of this space. I wouldn't be surprised if people keep calling their electronic music MP3's even after newer formats have taken a more substantial chunk of the pie. A once geeky acronym is now a household word. Not a good name? Maybe not a few years ago but today is a different story. If something has MP3 in its name is there a doubt about what it does? And as for marketing how about MP3 eXtreme! Is that better?

      Kanything, how about Ksomething - for the target audience this works. It integrates with/uses KDE widgets/services and does "something". I agreee that sometimes the "something" isn't very descriptive.

      Evolution - This is a good name? Why? What does this thing do? Gene splicing maybe.... This one is definitely out of the pages of some marketing cookbook - vaugue and sonorous.

    2. Re:common among many OSS projects by pimij · · Score: 1

      'FLAC' is a good name?? I'm not up on my acronyms but what is it - I get a lot of flack for the work I do - does it help me with that? Does it take the heat? I think it makes no more sense than OGG Vorbis.

    3. Re:common among many OSS projects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FLAC (you can derive the purpose from the name)

      The purpose is to shoot down enemy bombers?

      You're wrong about MP3, by the way. MP3 is a great name. It's short, catchy, and memorable. It's easy to say: "empee three." It rhymes internally. It's a great name.

      And, of course, it owns the mindshare. Nobody thinks "compressed digital music." They think "MP3."

      The fundamental problem with names like "Ogg," "Vorbis," "Gnome," "Gnu," and "Linux," among others, is that they're ugly. They're not appealing. They're not friendly.

      I know, I know, this is touchy-feely marketing fag stuff. But it matters. It really does.

      Which is the better name? "X-Chat" or "iChat?"

      Which is the better name? "Ogg?" or "QuickTime?"

    4. Re:common among many OSS projects by LPetrazickis · · Score: 1

      FLAC (you can derive the purpose from the name)

      Are you saying that FLAC shoots down airplanes and unpopular individuals?:)

      --
      Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
    5. Re:common among many OSS projects by LPetrazickis · · Score: 1

      Evolution - This is a good name? Why? What does this thing do? Gene splicing maybe.... This one is definitely out of the pages of some marketing cookbook - vaugue and sonorous.

      Well, it does sound cooler than Outlook. What does Outlook do? Sell binoculars over the web?:)

      --
      Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
    6. Re:common among many OSS projects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      • Kanyhting

      Yeah, you're right. That would be a bad name for a program :)

    7. Re:common among many OSS projects by Josh+Coalson · · Score: 1
      Are you saying that FLAC shoots down airplanes and unpopular individuals?:)

      Only occasionally. Flak works better for that.

      Josh

      P.S. m-w.com says:
      Etymology: German, from Fliegerabwehrkanonen, from Flieger (flyer) + Abwehr (defense) + Kanonen (cannons)

    8. Re:common among many OSS projects by lrucker · · Score: 1
      FLAC (you can derive the purpose from the name)

      Um, no, I can't

      Linux (Sounds like UNIX)

      And this is good because? By your rules, UNIX is not a good name - anyone who doesn't know what GNU is isn't likely to know what UNIX is either. So why is sounding like it good?

      As for "Audacity" or "Evolution" - what's good about them? And "X-Chat" sounds like a place where extreme sports fans hang out.

    9. Re:common among many OSS projects by yerricde · · Score: 1

      As for "Audacity" or "Evolution" - what's good about them?

      I don't know about "Evolution", but "Audacity" shares the first three letters with "audio", which it edits.

      --
      Will I retire or break 10K?
  22. Re:The name is everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, a codec falling out of favour because a developer of freeware has not answered the questions to the satisfaction of the forum administrators over patent FUD!!??

    This instantly raises red flags over this forum and how it operates.

    The forum being unilaterally closed says the rest.

  23. Re:The name is everything by Sumocide · · Score: 1

    '.MP3' is not a format, it's the usual file extension for the 'Motion Picture Experts Group Audio Layer 3' format. 'Ogg Vorbis' is certainly less descriptive.

  24. Re:The name is everything by krilli · · Score: 1
    ... to avoid advertising routes of legal attack ...
    That sentence is beautiful and scary.
    --
    Jag pratar lite svenska.
  25. Re:The name is everything by pizza_milkshake · · Score: 1

    that'll be in v2.0

  26. Dysfunctional organization by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting
    They've posted a notice stating that they're rethinking the standards of the community, and how they're enforced.

    Translation: key primadonnas are really sick and tired of all these stupid people who just don't get it and all their incompatible ideas they keep having to reject over and over and over. Sounds like one of those dysfunctional organizations. Death will be the best thing for it.

    1. Re:Dysfunctional organization by AndroidCat · · Score: 1
      all their incompatible ideas they keep having to reject over and over

      So what is the Hydrogenaudio equivalent of goatse posters? (Or should I ask?)

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    2. Re:Dysfunctional organization by Pathwalker · · Score: 1

      So what is the Hydrogenaudio equivalent of goatse posters?

      I would guess it would be people who post links to something like this.

      (If you want more audio monstrosities, look in that directory - I'm testing how different codecs respond at extremely low bit rates )

    3. Re:Dysfunctional organization by wynlyndd · · Score: 1

      People who claim "VQF is teh best format EVAR!"

      --
      "Dogs and cats, living together...it's mass hysteria!"
  27. Wrong. by Compact+Dick · · Score: 1

    Ogg Vorbis was mostly criticised for its lack of development - for over a year, nothing had happened since libVorbis 1.0 [20020717] was released. Other codecs such as HE-AAC and WMA9 were catching up, even beating it at lower bitrates which is Vorbis' forte.

    Patent issues are a real concern if you build and sell the Ogg Vorbis portables we all clamour for.

  28. Hope it comes back by Goo.cc · · Score: 2

    I have been a member of Hydrogenaudio for a while and I have to say that I have throughly enjoyed it. Even though I didn't post that often, it was an awesome resource.

    I hope that it returns soon.

  29. Re:The name is everything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, a codec falling out of favour because a developer of freeware has not answered the questions to the satisfaction of the forum administrators over patent FUD!!??

    It has absolutely nothing to do with the forum admins, they weren't even the ones who brought up the recent patent discussion. This situation is not as simple as you think it is. I'd give you links to the appropriate threads to see for yourself, but...

    This instantly raises red flags over this forum and how it operates.

    You are absolutely clueless. Wait till it becomes available again, and read the related threads before jumping to ill-informed conclusions like this.

    WTF does Ogg Vorbis have to to do with this whole issue anyway?

    The forum being unilaterally closed says the rest.

    It is not closed for good, it will be made available again as soon as some issues have been ironed out. Granted, the closure did come as a surprise even for some of the moderators, but given the way things were starting to go from the admins' point of view, it is understandable.

    Have you actually ever read the board? I doubt it, otherwise you wouldn't be making such negative comments. There is no other board I know of that is run as well as HA, both with regard to the "fairness" of the moderators and admins, and to the services provided. It's the fastest board I know of, yet there is not one single ad, and until now, it was financed totally privately by one of the admins (although, understandably, this is one of the things that will be changed in the future). I think that is very respectable.

  30. You are mistaken. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MP3 is not "evolving". MP3 is an evolutionary dead end. Fraunhoffer isn't "evolving" MP3--they've moved on to AAC. The "free software" world can't evolve MP3 because of the patents.

    MP3 is a dead-end.

    1. Re:You are mistaken. by orthogonal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      MP3 is an evolutionary dead end

      So are sharks and lichens.

      But they're not going to disappear anytime soon, and I doubt MP3 will either. Other formats may be technically superior, but (like technically superior primate brains) also require superior resources to support them; superior processor speed (OGG) or superior storage space (FLACC or Monkey).

      MP3 also probably has the largest share of the compressed audio formats, and there are definite drawbacks to transcoding: loss of fidelity, time to transcode, need to store both the old format and the new during the transition phase. So a significant portion of the corpus in MP3 will likely not be replaced with newer, better formats.

      And just as plenty of music has been compressed with MP3, plenty of players play MP3 -- and only MP3. Players like my 60GB portable. I've invested quite a bit in my portable, and that locks me into MP3. MP3 will stay around, because people with MP3 (only) players will still want music.

      Since MP3 is sufficient unto my needs, I certainly won't abandon it until and unless my portable breaks down (it's an Archos, so that might be soon). Even after my portable breaks down, I'll still have over 7000 MP3s, many of which were purchased through emusic.com, so I can't re-rip them. Unless transcoding to $next_format sounds better than a MP3, I won't be transcoding those files, which means when my portable MP3 player breaks down, I'll insist that the replacement play MP3. Only if my next portable plays both MP3s and $next_format will $next_format begin to interest me at all.

      So MP3 may well be an evolutionary dead end, but evolutionary dead end and species extinction are two very differnt things that don't necesarily correlate.

  31. Re:the discussion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My apologies, I had actually read it, but it must have escaped my mind when I posted. :-)

    What the first post states is complete nonsense and pure speculation. The media player discussion did turn into a flamewar, but that's not at all the reason for the closure of the forum. How silly would that be?

  32. Re:some clarification about HA by jam244 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That is all nice and well... however, I don't see how a non-profit community intends to create a new audio standards.

    To my knowledge, we haven't seen an audio format or codec that has reached tier 1 status (RedBook, MP3, WAV, MIDI, etc.) that did not have major corporate involvement in its development. Even with DivX, we often see industry-standard audio codecs used... I don't see a community-based codec group inventing a new codec that gets used for anything more than illegally ripping DVDs and posting them on KaZaA.

  33. Re:some clarification about HA by technology+is+sexy · · Score: 1

    HydrogenAudio is not trying to create new standards. It's merely a place to discuss the current formats and help the developers by providing listening tests and input.
    A lot of developers hang out there and discuss their ideas with the users (e.g. Ivan Dimkovic and Menno Baker - Ahead Nero AAC codec; Josh Coalson - FLAC; J.M. Valin - Speex; G. Bouvigne - LAME).

  34. Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    HydrogenAudio only did what Slashdot would have done had Slashdot not become a business. If you ran HA (or this site for that matter) and had watched it become a pit of uninformed discussion, social posturing, and pointless debate, wouldn't YOU also think about closing it down?

    1. Re:Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HA is not closing down for good, the admins have emphasized this several times.

      Also, HA has not become "pit of uninformed discussion, social posturing, and pointless debate". The standard of discussion has indeed lowered slightly over time (also due to the fact that some highly qualified members no longer participate actively), but it is still by far above average, and new, well-informed members are constantly joining.

  35. Re:Decent media players? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Winamp 5 eh? I bet thats nice and stable on your Athlon 64FX 5Ghz running Windows Longhorn SP5!

  36. Re:some clarification about HA by Zathrus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm rather amazed at how people are misreading the topic.

    The site is closed temporarily to rethink the standards of the community -- of the HydrogenAudio community, not of the music encoding community as a whole. They're not trying to create new audio compression standards while closed -- they're trying to formulate new rules to reduce flamage on the forums (which is pretty much all that HA is). If /. closed down for a week or two and said "we're rethinking the standards of the community" (which, btw, is not what their page says) would you think that they're trying to change OSS/Linux/geek standards, or just doing some serious rethinking of how the posting/moderation/meta-mod system works?

  37. You need 4X to record X. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And they would come with other crazy theories, for example challenging Shannon's theory that to encode a X Hz signal you only need 2X of bandiwdth.

    While that may be true, what people don't seem to understand is that to encode in PCM format any signal of frequency X, you need a rate of 4X. If your sine wave is perfectly aligned to the sample interval of a 2X samping, then it'll work at 2X, but if you shift it 90 degrees, every sample recorded turns out to be 0 since the waveform is crossing 0 at each sample interval. Thus you need 4X to record every phase alignment of X.

    1. Re:You need 4X to record X. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



      This was all hashed out in the 70s. 44100 Hz was picked because unless you had your head in someone's ass (easy feat for a few) you couldn't tell. For those with heads up their own asses they just stuck with vinyl, because they already knew better - from their point of view^H^H^H^Hsmell.

  38. Nevertheless by rkuris · · Score: 2, Interesting
    One does not take down a community on no notice, just because there's some heated discussion. They spend all this time building a community, people probably have friends there, and POOF! Suddenly, everyone else has to scramble to find someplace else to meet.

    Corporate sponsors or not, if there is a large community (as they claim), plans must be made to shut it down.

    Gee, what would happen if /. did that?

    --
    Get rid of everything Micro and Soft: Buy Viagra and/or Linux
    1. Re:Nevertheless by Zathrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One does not take down a community on no notice, just because there's some heated discussion.

      If it's a flamewar on a previously quiet board you may.

      Corporate sponsors or not

      HA has no corporate sponsors. Foobar2000 is a free program (not OSS IIRC, but no money to use).

      Gee, what would happen if /. did that?

      People would bitch and whine and find something else to do with their time. Subscribers would be the only ones with a valid issue.

      Free online forums have no obligation to their users to remain available. If the costs get too high, if the site becomes too much of a chore, or if things just aren't working as the site owners want them to they have every right to close up shop either temporarily or permanently.

    2. Re:Nevertheless by djefferies · · Score: 1

      One does not take down a community on no notice, just because there's some heated discussion.

      For god's sake, they didn't! The "heated discussion" is not the reason for the closure, the article submitted by verloren totally mispresents this (in fact the whole thing never should have been posted here, because it's quite irrelevant news here, and it was bound to be twisted by the uninformed crowd).

      Also, for the umpteenth time, HA is not closing for good, they will re-open within the next few days. Suppose they were updating the forum or server software and encountered complications, causing the site to be down for a few days, without any message or explanation at all. Nobody would say a word. Yet, in this case, despite there being a definitive notice stating that the site is not closed permanently , people make a hell of a fuss about it even though they have absolutely no reason to. What is it with you guys?

  39. Well, I'm glad to see this story... by lumpenprole · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...even though I'm really sorry to see they're having problems. As somebody who is forced to use a Win box at work, I've found foobar to be the best audio player hands down. It's really small footprint means I can work using three open memory hogging programs at once and still listen to music. If only it did streaming windows media, I'd never use anything else.

    I'm really hoping that this story leads to more attention being paid to foobar, as I think it's a real gem.

    --
    Disclaimer: MINAA (Mummy! I'm Not An Animal!)
  40. Re:not much information.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think he called himself "CmdrTaco"

  41. I know Candy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    I know Candy and she thinks nothing like that at all. She is only interested in how fat I think her butt looks.

  42. meta-$slashdot joke by DerProfi · · Score: 0
    In what I consider to be an etymological breakthrough, you've accidentally hamfisted a new and excellent word :-)

    slashdote
    intr.v. slash-dot-ed, slash-dot-ing, slash-dotes

    To show excessive fondness or love of Linux, OGG, or Steve Jobs: geeks who slashdote on their new iPod.

    slashdot'er n.

    --

    3000+ comments meta-modded. 0 mod points awarded.
    Lesson for other meta-suckers: Don't believe the hype!
  43. Re:Decent media players? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe I'm suggesting the obvious, but why don't you try iTunes? It's both free and fully-featured, and it's extensible through QuickTime components.

  44. They CLOSED because it costs TOO MUCH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    Communistic politics and high-bandwidth sites only work when someone else pays for it. RED CHINA lost their REDnaught. He's believed to be held up in a downtown bar, after knifing a negro waiter just trying to calm him down.

  45. Yes, AAC is like MP3 only better by porky_pig_jr · · Score: 1

    AAC essentially starts with improvement MP3 such as 100% MDCT (whereas MP3 is a hybrid solution), increased length of windows, all those things which should have been in MP3 in a first place, and now they can't be implemented because of incompatibility issues. So it is perfectly all right to think of AAC is like MP3 only better. It *is* better.

  46. FLAC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    FLAC (you can derive the purpose from the name)

    FLieger Abwehr Cannone?

  47. I'll add to that by bradasch · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Other formats may be technically superior...

    You are right, but I guess that for a lot of people, a MP3 encoded at 128k sounds the same as the original. That can happen for several reasons: you may have a low-quality output device (bad speakers, cheap and lousy headphones), a bad sound card, you may have some kind of hearing disability (you may be deaf for some high or low frequecies).

    So, agreeing with you, why should these people reencode their files using a better audio format? Like you mentioned, they already have several MP3 files, so it's kinda pointless to do so.

    1. Re:I'll add to that by Admiral+Burrito · · Score: 1
      I guess that for a lot of people, a MP3 encoded at 128k sounds the same as the original.

      I think those people just haven't done the side-by-side comparison. 128k sounds "good enough" so they don't really care. For most stuff it's pretty easy to tell 128k from 192k when given the same recording at the two bitrates playing one after the other; the 128k usually sounds louder (noisier).

  48. Re:Decent media players? by Hatta · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    XMMS of course. Or mplayer for command line goodness.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  49. One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Usenet

  50. I found the same thing in my test by tentimestwenty · · Score: 1

    http://www.recordstorereview.com/misc/aacmp3.shtml

    AAC vs. MP3 vs. OGG vs. AIF

  51. Re:did they... by t0ny · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    This is a joke. How the FUCK does this get modded a troll?

    --

    Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

  52. You're both right by yerricde · · Score: 1

    Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem. Nyquist formulated it; Shannon proved it formally.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  53. descriptive? by yerricde · · Score: 1

    it's the usual file extension for the 'Motion Picture Experts Group Audio Layer 3' format. 'Ogg Vorbis' is certainly less descriptive.

    .mp3: "Motion Picture Experts Group" container; "Audio Layer 3" codec.

    .ogg: "Ogg" container; "Vorbis" codec.

    How is the description of .ogg "certainly less descriptive"?

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  54. Re:did they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it was a shitty joke.

  55. Re:Foobar 2000 by mysta · · Score: 1
    I'd just like to add some weight to the parent's claim that Foobar is a real gem. I wholeheartedly agree.

    Foobar 2000 is now at a 0.71 release and is by far the most full featured and elegant media player I've seen on Windows. First time users might it a little sparse as the interface is very bland and not skinnable like Winamp or Sonique. However, under the hood is an amazing plugin architecture that is very well designed.

    Some highlights for me:

    • Oggs, Mp3s, MODs, FLACs, AACs, and heaps more are all playable.
    • Keypresses for every single action the player can perform are configurable either as local or global (ie, you can control F2K while in another application)
    • The masstagger. This is amazing for reorganising your audio collection. It can guess album titles, song titles and artists from filenames, add arbitrary tags and store all this information is AWE2 within each file.
    • The album list. Once you've tagged all your files, you can heavily customise the way your files are organised and displayed in the album list.
    • The search facilities. These are second to none. Very fast and very powerful.

    If you are using Windows and are listening to mp3s or oggs through WinAmp or Media Play I thoroughly recommend giving Foobar2000 a go.

    Kudos to the F2K team!

    --

    "Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge, and where is the knowledge we have lost in information?"-T.S.Eliot
  56. Re:Decent media players? by mantera · · Score: 1

    you retard; winamp 5 is already out in beta release

  57. Re:did they... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And your mother just finished raping your father with a strap-on. Whats your point?

  58. mods on crack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How is this off topic? The thread is "decent media players" Those are great players, if not for windows, so what?

  59. HA is back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hydrogenaudio is back online.