phidauex
Sees your every move. Eats your potatoes.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2002
- Posts
- 203
- Likes
- 10
Well, I've been reading a lot about Ogg Vorbis, and have heard good things about its sound quality.
For those of you who haven't heard about it, Ogg Vorbis is an Open Source audio compression system (read: free, unlike mp3s, which are licensed. If you've ever encoded an MP3, and not paid a royalty, then you are technically a thief), it is intended to compete with, and be better than, WMA, MP3, MP3pro and the like. The sound quality is supposedly better than any of the above, and the file size can be smaller. It uses new generation algorithms and technology to further compress audio, while retaining high sound quality. Winamp supports Ogg Vorbis (both decoding and encoding, though you may have to download a plugin), as well as many other players. The encoder software is still in RC3 beta, but now fully conforms to the Ogg Vorbis 1.0 specifications (earlier versions worked, but didn't fully conform to specs, so the sound quality was pretty bad, they were basically intended as 'proof of concept' encoders, and developer tools). The format is upgradeable, and so as the technology gets better, sound quality will go up, file size will go down, and encoding will get faster through optimization. All upgrades will be fully backward compatible.
This all sounds right as rain, however, most of what I've heard when it comes to sound quality basically amounts too "It sounded better." or "It was more... um.. Rich sounding.." Basically reviews by people who don't really know what to listen for, and how to describe what they are listening too. I've read a few things that suggest that Ogg has fundementally superior technology, and can produce higher sound quality, but I'd like to do some testing, and also hear some reviews by other people, not just people listening through their little computer speakers or their Sony V700DJ headphones, but people who can really get into the sound with high quality phones and amps and whatnot, and who are used to listening and evaluating what they hear.
I'm going to go home and encode some Ogg Vorbis stuff, and some MP3 stuff, and do some back to back testing.
But if anyone else has been doing this sort of testing, or would like to do some, please do. I've always been a big supporter of the Open Source movement, and would love to support an open source, higher quality compression format. I love my mp3s, but if ogg can sound better at similar file sizes, then I'll switch.
A few notes, when talking about the 'quality' of Ogg Vorbis files, please use the 'quality' level, IE, "Quality 2" or "Quality 4.97". The bitrate is inherently variable, and isn't a good measure of the quality of .ogg files. Also, other things besides bitrate change with the 'quality number', such as cross channel encoding and such. As a reference, "Quality 2" is supposed to be roughly equivalent to 128kbs mp3s. Most people can't distinguish Quality 3 or 4 from their CDs. "Quality 7" and above are said to be so close that only the best of the best golden eared folks can distinguish it from the source CD.
Also note that there is a file size spike at "Quality 5" and above. This is because at 5 and above, Ogg doesn't perform the cross channel coupling. I'm going to focus on qualities below 5, because file size IS important to me, because I plan on using these files on portable players (Such as my SlimX, once the firmware supports it (which is coming soon!)).
So anyway, I just wanted to get some people talking about this, and see if anyone is interested in performing, or has already performed, some true A/B testing with Ogg.
For your reference, visit www.vorbis.com for more information on the Ogg Vorbis format.
Peace,
Phidauex
For those of you who haven't heard about it, Ogg Vorbis is an Open Source audio compression system (read: free, unlike mp3s, which are licensed. If you've ever encoded an MP3, and not paid a royalty, then you are technically a thief), it is intended to compete with, and be better than, WMA, MP3, MP3pro and the like. The sound quality is supposedly better than any of the above, and the file size can be smaller. It uses new generation algorithms and technology to further compress audio, while retaining high sound quality. Winamp supports Ogg Vorbis (both decoding and encoding, though you may have to download a plugin), as well as many other players. The encoder software is still in RC3 beta, but now fully conforms to the Ogg Vorbis 1.0 specifications (earlier versions worked, but didn't fully conform to specs, so the sound quality was pretty bad, they were basically intended as 'proof of concept' encoders, and developer tools). The format is upgradeable, and so as the technology gets better, sound quality will go up, file size will go down, and encoding will get faster through optimization. All upgrades will be fully backward compatible.
This all sounds right as rain, however, most of what I've heard when it comes to sound quality basically amounts too "It sounded better." or "It was more... um.. Rich sounding.." Basically reviews by people who don't really know what to listen for, and how to describe what they are listening too. I've read a few things that suggest that Ogg has fundementally superior technology, and can produce higher sound quality, but I'd like to do some testing, and also hear some reviews by other people, not just people listening through their little computer speakers or their Sony V700DJ headphones, but people who can really get into the sound with high quality phones and amps and whatnot, and who are used to listening and evaluating what they hear.
I'm going to go home and encode some Ogg Vorbis stuff, and some MP3 stuff, and do some back to back testing.
But if anyone else has been doing this sort of testing, or would like to do some, please do. I've always been a big supporter of the Open Source movement, and would love to support an open source, higher quality compression format. I love my mp3s, but if ogg can sound better at similar file sizes, then I'll switch.
A few notes, when talking about the 'quality' of Ogg Vorbis files, please use the 'quality' level, IE, "Quality 2" or "Quality 4.97". The bitrate is inherently variable, and isn't a good measure of the quality of .ogg files. Also, other things besides bitrate change with the 'quality number', such as cross channel encoding and such. As a reference, "Quality 2" is supposed to be roughly equivalent to 128kbs mp3s. Most people can't distinguish Quality 3 or 4 from their CDs. "Quality 7" and above are said to be so close that only the best of the best golden eared folks can distinguish it from the source CD.
Also note that there is a file size spike at "Quality 5" and above. This is because at 5 and above, Ogg doesn't perform the cross channel coupling. I'm going to focus on qualities below 5, because file size IS important to me, because I plan on using these files on portable players (Such as my SlimX, once the firmware supports it (which is coming soon!)).
So anyway, I just wanted to get some people talking about this, and see if anyone is interested in performing, or has already performed, some true A/B testing with Ogg.
For your reference, visit www.vorbis.com for more information on the Ogg Vorbis format.
Peace,
Phidauex