>Yeah. xiph.org really has to get that integer-maths Vorbis decoder done for the hardware players. That's a BIG problem with the Vorbis 1.0 package as released
It's been done for months! Available directly from xiph.org on request. Alternatively, the spec is out so anyone can write his own. The spec even contains explicit pointers to what integer decoders need to look out for.
>That said, ogg is dead. Name one portable music >player that supports ogg.
iPAQ. Zaurus. Oh sorry, thats two.
>Name one that will.
NDA, sorry:)
-- GCP
Re:Hopefully, R3mix.net will pick this up
on
Ogg Vorbis 1.0
·
· Score: 2
>What is the recommendation for OGG to produce >CD-Quality sound - regardless of bitrate?
>Is it still 256k? Is it 192k? Do you tell the VBR >to go between 192 and 320?
As I said above, if you used r3mix, then -q4 or -q5 is safe.
-- GCP
Re:Hopefully, R3mix.net will pick this up
on
Ogg Vorbis 1.0
·
· Score: 3, Informative
>I'd love for r3mix.net (or a similar site) to >analyze the OGG format so I can be ensured that at >x bitrate, it is the same as CD-quality. I >currently rip mp3s at 256k, using options that >r3mix.net recommends, and I must say I've been very >happy. However, now that ogg is out, I will switch >all future rips to that format.
Most of the analysis on r3mix.net is way outdated, and most people involved with LAME left it after it turned out the author wasn't intrested in maximal quality, but just to promote 'his' preset. Most codec developers hang out on hydrogenaudio.org nowadays.
Ogg Vorbis has by default highly tuned VBR modes, which get to r3mix quality at about -q4 to -q5, so there is little need for 'special' presets.
>I suspect for many casual listeners, the difference between MP3 and Ogg isn't hugely noticeable for most files.
At 128kbps, probably not so easy. But try 64kbps:)
-- GCP
Re:Still no specification
on
Ogg Vorbis 1.0
·
· Score: 5, Informative
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A reference implementation is great and all, but until they get off their arses and release an exact specification of the Ogg format and codec, it's never going to take off. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
Vorbis 1.0 comes with a full specification.
-- GCP
All servers down - thank you slashdot!
on
Ogg Vorbis 1.0
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
All xiph.org and vorbis.com servers have been taken down to prevent slashdotting untill the mirroring is completed.
Thank you slashdot, you just ed us.
-- GCP
Argh, too early
on
Ogg Vorbis 1.0
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
They are _not_ out yet. The link are still pointing to RC3. Slashdot was too early.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ogg vorbis can not compare their methods with any patents that are in the review process. And once the patent is granted, prior art has to be before the application date! IIRC. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Vorbis has been around since 1994. I would be surprised if the review process takes 8 years??
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is a lot of misunderstanding in the open source community as to how patents work. The claims made by Ogg Vorbis (i.e. it is patent free) are extremely unlikely to be true. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There seems to be a lot of misundestanding in you how Ogg Vorbis is (was) developed. It was *specifically* designed with prior knowledge of the existing patents in mind, and 2 independant patent searches were done (one of which by AOL!) to verify that nothing was being infringed.
>Strategy games should not do this - It's like >playing a game of chess where when you capture >the oponents pieces you get to put them on your >side. Fun ? Maybe once or twice for the low- >attention span crowd, but it's not strategy.
Actually, this is called 'crazyhouse' chess, and it's being played at pretty high level on the chess servers.
Sure, it's different from chess, but that doesn't make it easy or simple.
Some of the low-price cards are actually surprisingly good. The SoundBlaster PCI 128 (actually an Ensoniq card) is notorious among some audio freaks because the outputs are of better quality than the much more expensive SoundBlaster Live cards.
The nice thing about this review is that they actually admit their own 'audio quality' test is flawed. That's good, but if you know it, it's stupid to still do it anyway.
Good evaluation of audio and sighted testing don't mix - ever.
There's a lot of code out there that uses -ffast-math. Perhaps the scientific simulations don't, but the kind of code that normal people actually use does.
Think of mp3 decoding, divx playing, 3d games, etc...
>This requires the programmer to be talented at >writing machine learning code, but not >necessarily talented at the game of chess.
The same is true for programs like Fritz. I suck at chess (rated 1300), but my program will beat GrandMasters. The computers do not mimic the human way of playing chess - they're completely different. For making them play better, 'human' ideas fail often.
Slashdot Mirror
>Yeah. xiph.org really has to get that integer-maths Vorbis decoder done for the hardware players. That's a BIG problem with the Vorbis 1.0 package as released
It's been done for months! Available directly from xiph.org on request. Alternatively, the spec is out so anyone can write his own. The spec even contains explicit pointers to what integer decoders need to look out for.
--
GCP
>Speaking as an audiophile and an audio engineer, and strictly referring to sound quality: mp3pro is better.
Current group listening tests contradict this. You didn't state how you arrived at this conclusion either.
--
GCP
>That said, ogg is dead. Name one portable music
:)
>player that supports ogg.
iPAQ. Zaurus. Oh sorry, thats two.
>Name one that will.
NDA, sorry
--
GCP
>What is the recommendation for OGG to produce >CD-Quality sound - regardless of bitrate?
>Is it still 256k? Is it 192k? Do you tell the VBR >to go between 192 and 320?
As I said above, if you used r3mix, then -q4 or -q5 is safe.
--
GCP
>I'd love for r3mix.net (or a similar site) to
>analyze the OGG format so I can be ensured that at
>x bitrate, it is the same as CD-quality. I
>currently rip mp3s at 256k, using options that
>r3mix.net recommends, and I must say I've been very
>happy. However, now that ogg is out, I will switch
>all future rips to that format.
Most of the analysis on r3mix.net is way outdated, and most people involved with LAME left it after it turned out the author wasn't intrested in maximal quality, but just to promote 'his' preset. Most codec developers hang out on hydrogenaudio.org nowadays.
Ogg Vorbis has by default highly tuned VBR modes, which get to r3mix quality at about -q4 to -q5, so there is little need for 'special' presets.
--
GCP
>I suspect for many casual listeners, the difference between MP3 and Ogg isn't hugely noticeable for most files.
:)
At 128kbps, probably not so easy. But try 64kbps
--
GCP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>
A reference implementation is great and all, but until they get off their arses and release an exact specification of the Ogg format and codec, it's never going to take off.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Vorbis 1.0 comes with a full specification.
--
GCP
All xiph.org and vorbis.com servers have been taken down to prevent slashdotting untill the mirroring is completed.
Thank you slashdot, you just ed us.
--
GCP
They are _not_ out yet. The link are still pointing to RC3. Slashdot was too early.
--
GCP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ; ;
Ogg vorbis can not compare their methods with any patents that are in the review process. And once the patent is granted, prior art has to be before the application date! IIRC.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Vorbis has been around since 1994. I would be surprised if the review process takes 8 years??
--
GCP
>>>>> ... and, similary, a patched GNU/Linux is completely free of any remote security holes.
>>>>>
We don't know how many bugs are left in code. There are only a limited number of patents. The comparison is senseless.
--
GCP
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ; ;
There is a lot of misunderstanding in the open source community as to how patents work. The claims made by Ogg Vorbis (i.e. it is patent free) are extremely unlikely to be true.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
There seems to be a lot of misundestanding in you how Ogg Vorbis is (was) developed. It was *specifically* designed with prior knowledge of the existing patents in mind, and 2 independant patent searches were done (one of which by AOL!) to verify that nothing was being infringed.
It is completely free of any patent burden.
--
GCP
>Strategy games should not do this - It's like
>playing a game of chess where when you capture
>the oponents pieces you get to put them on your
>side. Fun ? Maybe once or twice for the low-
>attention span crowd, but it's not strategy.
Actually, this is called 'crazyhouse' chess, and it's being played at pretty high level on the chess servers.
Sure, it's different from chess, but that doesn't make it easy or simple.
--
GCP
>24 bit audio in a pc is not really practical as
>24-bit audio means an equivalent SNR of 59 dB.
You misspelled 144dB.
--
GCP
>>>
I've read varying accounts that due to the complex timing of dual CPU systems that decent audio is difficult if not impossible
>>>
Urban myth
--
GCP
Got a dictionary from Santa?
The alternative is to buy good headphones. You can get lower-end Sennheisers for the price of a crappy box set.
Your neightbours will love you more as well.
--
GCP
Some of the low-price cards are actually surprisingly good. The SoundBlaster PCI 128 (actually an Ensoniq card) is notorious among some audio freaks because the outputs are of better quality than the much more expensive SoundBlaster Live cards.
The nice thing about this review is that they actually admit their own 'audio quality' test is flawed. That's good, but if you know it, it's stupid to still do it anyway.
Good evaluation of audio and sighted testing don't mix - ever.
--
GCP
I don't get what you are trying to insinuate here. As you said, they both use glibc. So the rest of your comment is senseless.
--
GCP
There's a lot of code out there that uses -ffast-math. Perhaps the scientific simulations don't, but the kind of code that normal people actually use does.
Think of mp3 decoding, divx playing, 3d games, etc...
--
GCP
They missed the most important part: profile feedback optimizations.
This is one part where Intel C really gets way and beyond the GCC compiler. Compile first with -prof_genx, run program, recompile with -prof_use.
The speedups are _big_. Intel C will totally kick GCC's butt with this option enabled.
GCC can also do profiling feedback optimizations, but it is not nearly as good.
--
GCP
IPO has been producing incorrect code in 5.0, 5.5, and 6.0. You have to be lucky that your program isn't affected.
OTOH, it's faster even without that switch.
--
GCP
>At the next big computer vs. grand master game,
/.-ing, probably, right now it's not too bad because you need to be a member to watch the games, which rules out most people)
>the computer will have a website where people
>can check the game progress in real-time.
Prediction? This has been the case for a while...
(as for
--
GCP
>Note too that the interview site is that of the
:)
>makers of Fritz, hence the infomercial quality
>of this content.
And the person that sent in the article is the owner of the company that sells Fritz.
Maybe they should have bought ad space instead, but hey, this was cheaper indeed
--
GCP
>This requires the programmer to be talented at
>writing machine learning code, but not
>necessarily talented at the game of chess.
The same is true for programs like Fritz. I suck at chess (rated 1300), but my program will beat GrandMasters. The computers do not mimic the human way of playing chess - they're completely different. For making them play better, 'human' ideas fail often.
--
GCP