Search Members Help

» Welcome Guest
[ Log In :: Register ]

Page 1 of 3123>>

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]

 reply to topic new topic new poll
Topic: Ogg Vorbis VS MP3< Next Oldest | Next Newest >
 Post Number: 1
Blain Search for posts by this member.
FNG
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 306
Joined: Sep. 2000
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 10 2001,01:58  Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE
A little while ago cr0bar recommended that Catknight ditch all his mp3s’ and rip his music as an Ogg Vorbis format instead, because it sounded much better. The possibility of a noticeable increase in music quality greatly intrigued me (I have a VERY nice sound system) and when I found this thread I immediately downloaded an Ogg encoder. I proceeded to rip a song (Shastakovich’s fifth symphony, first movement) at 320 kbps (what I use for a standard) in .ogg, .mp3, and .wav and listen to them. The .wav and .mp3 sounded very similar (nearly indistinguishable), but the .ogg sounded very noticeably higher in pitch, while about the same in clarity. I also noticed that the .ogg file was 16:16 minutes long, whereas the .wav and .mp3 were both 17:42 min long, this leads me to think that the .ogg is simply sped up in order to achieve better treble.

I only downloaded a few .ogg encoders (for this experiment i used LitexMedia) and they all either limited my encoding rate or had a limited trial period, so if anyone (cr0?) could suggest a GOOD free encoder that I could try, I would be very appreciative. I am all for a better, more efficient method of encoding music; but, so far, Ogg Vorbis hasn’t achieved that.

Edit: I am winning a game of “drink until you fall down” do you really think I can post a coherent message?

This message has been edited by Blain on September 10, 2001 at 09:03 PM

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 2
CatKnight Search for posts by this member.
Jedi Republican
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 10 2001,02:37 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE
wow blain I was about to post this topic. Anyway I have done my own tests and found that ogg 192, lame --r3mix, and the original cd wav, are all indistinguishable. however, the r3mix clip is considerably smaller then the ogg 192. don't believe me? test it yourself.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 3
Blain Search for posts by this member.
FNG
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 306
Joined: Sep. 2000
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 10 2001,02:54 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE
This might just be my drunken ass talking, but did you send me to an audio testing site (i didn't spend a lot of time there)?
I was talking more about my personal experience, and I can most definitely tell the difference between a 192 Kbs mp3 (I believe lame), ogg, and wav ( I am unfamiliar with r3mix); which is why I encode at 320 Kbs. Even at 320 Kbs I can still easily tell the difference between listening to a CD on my computer (digital out) and an mp3 on my computer, that’s why I wondered if I possibly downloaded a shitty encoder when the mp3 sounded better then the ogg.

This message has been edited by Blain on September 10, 2001 at 09:58 PM

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 4
ASCIIMan Search for posts by this member.
-- Insert Witty Title Here --
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 408
Joined: Sep. 2000
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 10 2001,03:53 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE
Okay, get Exact Audio Copy. Best ripper / encoder interface / audio burner hands down.

I rip with lame --r3mix. I find it pretty much indistinguishable from the original .wav (except for some things like white noise, extreme percussion, etc., but pretty much the only way to fix that is to use lossless compression). Except for those isolated events I mentioned above, I can't tell the difference using my super-duper headphones and 1337 listening skillz. More on the --r3mix setting.


edit - Oh yeah, EAC can use pretty much anything to encode. It has built-in support for most of the mp3 encoders, ogg, and the popular lossless formats, and will support anything with a command line interface.

And, Blain, I seriously doubt you can tell the differance between 320 and the cd, unless you're running at CBR. VBR can actually have higher quality than a CBR 320 kbps mp3.

This message has been edited by ASCIIMan on September 10, 2001 at 10:58 PM

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 5
CatKnight Search for posts by this member.
Jedi Republican
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 14 2001,13:53 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE
yeah blain is full of shit. he thinks he can tell the difference between two cd quality samples. he won't even try to test them with a double-blind wav compare program.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 6
RenegadeSnark Search for posts by this member.
Old School
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 534
Joined: May 2000
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 14 2001,15:35 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE
Ogg, while it should sound excellent at 320 kbit like all the other formats, beats MP3 256Kbit at its own 192kbit VBR. MP3's sound "clipped" - that is, the top and bottom of the sine wave of sound are normalized. This also tends to flatten out the spatial and density qualities of many songs, which Ogg does not do.

As for your songs being different lengths, you're way off base. I don't know how you ended up with a shorter file, but I'd look into your encoder.

Personally, my rips are done with ripper-X which shells to the GNU/Linux ogg encoder and CD Paranoia as a ripper (set at 1x digital, maximum paranoia). I get really fucking fantastic audio out of that.

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 7
CatKnight Search for posts by this member.
Jedi Republican
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 14 2001,20:46 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE
hey snark I'm talking about comparing a lame --r3mix mp3 to a 192 vorbis one. the r3mix ones usually average around 170-190 kbps and sound completely transparent. I'm not bashing vorbis, I think it sounds fine. I'm just saying that there is no advantage in using vorbis since the files aren't really any smaller, and ogg files are not supported by as much software/hardware, and are not very popular.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 8
RenegadeSnark Search for posts by this member.
Old School
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 534
Joined: May 2000
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 15 2001,01:03 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE
A stock Ogg versus a --r3mix. I can actually tell a difference... many people can, and I'm not bashing your ears or anything but even --r3mix seems to have artifacts.

Besides, I use Ogg because I like to be able to support a patent-free, open-source format. That's also one of the many reasons I think PNG is better than JPEG (that, and the fact that PNG images look much better and support 48 bit color with a full channel of alpha transparency).

Viva la revolution!

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
 Post Number: 9
CatKnight Search for posts by this member.
Jedi Republican
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 3807
Joined: Dec. 2000
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 15 2001,02:00 Skip to the previous post in this topic. Skip to the next post in this topic. Ignore posts   QUOTE
I'm going to have to ask you to get that audio compare program from the link I mentioned above, make 3 sample wav files (1 cd rip, 1 r3mix=>wav, one ogg=>wav), and run all three. I seriously doubt you will be able to hear a difference, unless you have a บ,000 stereo system or electrostatic headphones hooked up to your puter. I thought I would be able to, but then I tried it and I wasn't. Use normal clips btw, not some strange random clips that just happen to show a minor difference.
Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info WEB 
 Post Number: 10
RenegadeSnark Search for posts by this member.
Old School
Avatar



Group: Members
Posts: 534
Joined: May 2000
PostIcon Posted on: Sep. 15 2001,02:09 Skip to the previous post in this topic.  Ignore posts   QUOTE
My father and I have really good ears... in the living room he spent บ,000 on his system - a Paradigm 5.1 set of speakers and a Marantz SR-19 receiver... the backyard speakers alone are a 񘈨 set of B&W's.

I have a Cambridge Soundworks DTT-2500. It sounds pretty good, and I can tell a difference between Ogg and mp3. Ogg sounds closer to WAV.

Offline
Top of Page Profile Contact Info 
22 replies since Sep. 10 2001,01:58 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >

[ Track This Topic :: Email This Topic :: Print this topic ]


Page 1 of 3123>> 		reply to topic new topic new poll

» Quick Reply Ogg Vorbis VS MP3
iB Code Buttons
You are posting as:

Do you wish to enable your signature for this post?
Do you wish to enable emoticons for this post?
Track this topic
View All Emoticons
View iB Code