MP3 vs. OGG
Nov 14, 2003 at 11:43 PM Post #16 of 24
Quote:

Originally posted by blessingx
Sorry master83, we're really deviating from your original post concerning a player with MP3/Ogg support.


tongue.gif
That's OK. I'm learning pretty much when you guys go on and on about different formats. Keep up the good work!
wink.gif
 
Nov 15, 2003 at 12:06 AM Post #17 of 24
I did a private mpc-ogg-mp3 comparison a while ago, as well. My conclusion was the same (mpc>ogg>mp3)
mp3 suffers on the high end, even at high bitrates...
Musepack(mpc) is undoubtedly the best lossy format, sound-quality wise. Unfortunate that there's so little support for it for portable players and the like.
 
Nov 15, 2003 at 12:25 AM Post #18 of 24
Quote:

Originally posted by Stephonovich
Nope, I've never tested AAC. I might do so tonight if I'm so inclined. I have nothing better to do. But also, AAC is pretty much a propietary format, isn't it?


It's owned pretty much by the same companies that own MP3 with the addition of Dolby. It's also being pushed much harder for wider acceptance by a few, such as Apple's iTunes. There are publically available encoders out there, provided by Nero and Quicktime, for example. There's also some more rogue-ish projects out there.

Ogg Vorbis, it's open source, and it's spreading.

MPC has it's decoder open sourced as well. It's encoder and decoder will both be opened upon the completion of StreamVersion 8, a revision of its container. However, it's also worth noting that while Xiph is willing to claim its patent free, the actual answer with Vorbis, according to both some current and former developers is 'We don't know, but we're pretty sure'. MPC had a similar issue a while ago, but suspects all relevant patents on sideband related encoding has either already expired or will by next year. All attempts to contact anyone who'd own such patents have met with no bites.

I suspect Vorbis would mysteriously crop up with patents its stepping on if larger companies suddenly decided it was a threat and started digging harder than Xiph could afford to. However, it's just as likely that if and when that occurs, stuff would have been long since expired. I suppose the point of mentioning this all, which has been beaten to death elsewhere.. is to leave it at 'Don't hold your breath'.

But as I said, I didn't hear all too much difference between them.

Listen up along the higher end. You can hear it injecting noise where there shouldn't be. It tends to slightly flatten the whole sound, much more clausterphobic. I've been able to spot Vorbis in ABX situations at pretty much any bitrate due to how it leaves a signature like that. Overall, it seems like MP3 is more likely to leave out small little nuances that Vorbis will pick up on but also add masking noise where it shouldn't. Vorbis has it's place for use with games and such, but I'd NEVER trust my music to it. It's simply not good enough and I'm not willing to compromise because it's supposedly 'open'.

NOTE: While some can claim that this is entirely my opinion, ABX blind testing is proving I am actually hearing somethingl. A few others I run with can hear similar. In all fairness I will also note that I've met ONE person who can ABX Musepack at almost any bitrate, but they're quite unique.

And Ogg is much smaller. I might run some tests on a nice symphonic piece I have. That would put a bit more strain on 'em.

You can control the bitrate of MPC by using different presets than --standard (aka --q5). You can even use fractions like --q4.4 or whatever. What I suggest you do if you decide to test is to actually clip 5-10 seconds out of a couple varied tracks, encode 'em all consistantly across formats so far as bitrate and then go for it. You'll be able to focus a lot harder on shorter clips.

Ah yes, and as for WMA... I abso-freaking-lutely hate M$, so I'll never use WMA, even if their files are smaller
biggrin.gif
My real fear is closed source, actually. If a company goes bye-bye (not much chance with M$, but just a hypothetical company), there goes support, and all development. With open source, there's other users that pick up where you left off.


And that's entirely your decision to do so. I just strongly caution anyone from letting 'open source' cloud judgement.
 
Nov 15, 2003 at 12:59 AM Post #19 of 24
MPC is open source? This I did not know. Cool. But still, as you said, there's a lack of portable support.

As for high end noise, as I've said, I don't have the best setup. Right now, I can't hear a difference. But that's why I believe in lossless, i.e. FLAC. I've got a WD 120GB hard drive (8MB cache, special edition, boo-yah!) coming soon, and when that happens, I'm gonna rip every one of my CD's to the HD. I figure once a new codec comes out that's better, or I upgrade my system, I'll re-encode.

Yeah, I know you can control MPC's bitrate. I just chose --q5 because it was supposedly where it becomes transparent. I was trying to get that level on every codec.

I still maintain that there's always an as-good or better open source alternative to every product. Ogg, IMO, beats out the competition overall. You claim sound quality isn't as good as MPC, and while that may be, Ogg has portable support, smaller filesizes, and the like. And let's face it; lossy is better suited to portable use, where you won't notice small sound artifacts. (I'm not talking about 128 CBR files... those are crap, period) At home, use your CD's, or FLAC, or what-have-you.

(-:Stephonovich:)
 
Nov 15, 2003 at 1:43 AM Post #20 of 24
Almost all of the files on my ihp-120 are encoded into OGG and it is working out grrrrrrrrreat!

(thought id throw some Tony the Tiger in there
biggrin.gif
)
 
Nov 15, 2003 at 3:44 AM Post #21 of 24
I think we should be careful about specifying bit range as some of us may have different targets (which codec is capable of smallest file size for decent sound versus which is capable of best sound quality at decent bitrate).

After all it's easy to make the results MP3>Ogg>MPC.

The above LAME v. Ogg site and this one (thanks badmonkey) show encoders rankings switching based on bitrate. Who would have thought (at least with eariler versions) LAME 256 would sound better than 320?

Also the 128 test.

If I understand it (someone correct me if I'm wrong) MPC is a heavy tweaked version of MP2. AAC came out of the same (now MP4 which seems to be in the progress of becoming a standard in audio and video).

Another FLAC user, though 224 AAC is my default lossy.
 
Nov 15, 2003 at 10:40 PM Post #22 of 24
I encode my OGG files into 197k (via oggdrop) and I think the sound is very pleasing considering it is compressed music.
tongue.gif
 
Nov 23, 2003 at 2:50 PM Post #23 of 24
I heard somewhere that ogg has problems with stereo seperation. What of it? I'm considering going ogg, but might just hold out until 1.1 comes out with its promised quality improvements. Or, if iriver comes out with aac support maybe I'd just go that route instead.
 
Nov 23, 2003 at 5:21 PM Post #24 of 24
Quote:

Originally posted by karmypolitics
I heard somewhere that ogg has problems with stereo seperation. What of it? I'm considering going ogg, but might just hold out until 1.1 comes out with its promised quality improvements. Or, if iriver comes out with aac support maybe I'd just go that route instead.


I haven't followed ogg closely, but it is true that some early MP3 encoders had problems with overusing joint-stereo mode. I don't know of any modern MP3 encoders that still have this problem.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top