mp3 vs ogg vorbis?

[Buck Birdseed]

Originally posted by The Viceroy
wav,raw ?? and put the sample rate at 1Mb a second .. watch it chew your HD !

Why on earth would I need to do this? CDs are only about 1 Mb every 6 seconds or so... Sampling up won't make the sound any clearer.

That said, my (more-or-less) temporary CD-copying directory contains some 8.5 Gb of files so far.

[Sirotnikov]

It seems that vog is a bit smaller, but since it ain't as popular, i wouldn't use it.

[The Viceroy]

Buck, yes .. I know, I was being silly .. should have used the smiley face and of course, you can only be as clear - transport loss, as the source you are copying from, but thats stating the obvious ..

[Fve Crathva]

I like the idea of ogg vorbis, and I rip CDs into ogg. MP3's still ubiquitous. The future of ogg would be solidified if more than one company would release portable ogg players.

SP

[Thue]

I have ripped my CD collection to ogg . Why use anything else.

[Whaleboy]

tip to those who might consider using oggs after this: Use VBR (variable bit rate) as opposed to CBR (constant bit rate). What this does is enable ogg to use its algorithm to compress the sound in a manner that is suited to the music.

mp3 and ogg algorithms work mainly by removing elements of the sound wave that is inaudible to humans. Mp3's has a tendency to cut into the audible range, reducing quality, and the compression can also have that same effect. The ogg algorithm is more sophisticated, and doesnt cut into audible stuff. The compression algorithm I would imagine is more liberal, but takes out unused bits (of which there are plenty in music), whereas mp3 does not afaik.

If you use the commandline to encode (in *nix) like I do, the use something like this (you can translate the same with gui's etc)...

oggenc -q 10 *.wav

That will encode all the wav files (freshly ripped from a cd) into oggs, at quality 10/10 (obviously, that sets the VBR to optimise for high quality, which translates to about 500kb/s.) About 3 or 4 would give 128-160kb/s although this by definition does vary.

When you install the plugins, it plays like any other music file!

[Al B. Sure!]

ogg vorbis? it'll never catch on until a better name is made

[St Leo]

I rip to ogg with minimum of 128, average of 192, and max of 320.

[Q Classic]

i like ogg vorbis. i have a few files with them, and i'm happy.

incidentally, a lot of what ogg is putting out is quite interesting. i do like their video codec, which allows for multiple audio streams and subtitles alongside the video--with no discernible drop in quality, and at the same size as divx5.0.

quite nice, quite nice.

[Urban Ranger]

ogg has better quality, but needs the critical mass.

[Adagio]

Which app do you use to compress into ogg?

[raghar]

Ogg is current best algorithm for low bitrates. AAC is somewhat better at higher bitrates, but isn't free.
This is a little file on lower bitrates

http://apolyton.net/upload/files/raghar/chronohome72.zip

[Adagio]

ok, thx

[MRT144]

Originally posted by Buck Birdseed
Where's the "I kinda like my sub-bass heavy and tweeter crisp and think compression is evil" option?

compression is your friend!!!

overcompression is just as bad as undercompression though.

[Ari Rahikkala]

elijah, I appreciate the evangelism (Vorbis rocks!) but I'd really prefer that you would not seem so confused...

mp3's are pretty much omnipotent, but they are closed source, some licencing issues are potential problems, and generally give mediocre quality.

I'm not quite sure of what to call the MPEG standards, but "open and non-free" would be pretty close (both in Debianish and "common" contexts). If you want to sell mpeg codecs, you have to license them (this makes the MPEG standards non-free). OTOH, it seems to me that authors of mp3 encoders and decoders haven't had to reverse engineer the format, which implies that it is publicly documented somewhere - and, I reckon, free for certain uses (at least unofficially). But anyway, what you should remember is that you can't call a file format (like mp3) closed-source or open-source. The closest you can get is calling the Fraunhofer Institute's original mp3 encoder closed-source (and it is). But LAME, at least, is open and free.

Something to do with a better compression algorithm. For example, if you have a 3MB file, with the same song, one is mp3, one is ogg, the ogg will be able to give higher bitrate despite being the same size. Also doesnt cut ouf as many of the audible frequency ranges.

Nope, you've got it all mixed up. Bitrate is the amount of seconds encoded in a file divided by the amount of bits in that file. The codec doesn't change that (ogg is a container format, though, and I'm not sure if it's more efficient than, say, .avi - if it is, it is possible that what you said is true but it would not matter since containers take up a marginal amount of space anyway and only the bits that are fed to the decoder actually matter in bitrate calculations). The difference between Vorbis and mp3 is that Vorbis packs more *data* (details of sound in this case) in x bytes than mp3 does.

I think vorbis are working on a number of open source media formats so that will certainly increase oggs profile, on open source platforms as well as mac and windows.

You mean xiph.org. Xiphophorus is the team that's working on the Ogg media container, the Vorbis audio stream codec, and the Tarkin and Theora video stream codecs. Note the difference. I'm splitting hairs here, yeah, but as far as I know you could put mp3 data inside an Ogg file and Vorbis data inside, say, Quicktime or AVI containers. I have to confess that all this stuff about codecs, formats, containers, standards, etc. confuses me, too, but I hope we all are at least a bit closer to the truth now...