Ogg Vorbis goes 1.0 final

vbimport

#1

I just posted the article Ogg Vorbis goes 1.0 final.

neoufo51 used our newssubmit to tell us that the more and more populair open source, lossy audio compression technology Ogg Vorbis has released it’s ‘gold’ version last night.

The technology is…

Read the full article here:  [http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/4149-Ogg-Vorbis-goes-1_0-final.html](http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/4149-Ogg-Vorbis-goes-1_0-final.html)

Feel free to add your comments below. 

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

Hurray! Got a HeadAC3he compile 2 nights ago. Great work. Tried it at quality: 0. Incredibly good.


#3

They’re still working on that thing? I thought mp3 was already the world standard?


#4

Yes, that’s the same thing with the RIAA, they also currently dominate the world music industry don’t they ? And you want to change that too, don’t you ? :wink:


#5

Problem is I’ve already bought an MP3 player. And so have a lot of people. :c


#6

Official announcement in a couple of days in www.vorbis.com Get the encoder (compiled with Intel Compiler 6.0) here: http://audio.ciara.us/rarewares/ OGG will soon rule. Give it a try and you’ll see why such excitement! Winamp 2.80 Standard and Full edition can play OGG files by default!


#7

Wow this is great! I use Ogg Vorbis a lot. If I rip my CDs they go into Ogg Vorbis which gives me smaller and better sounding files. Too bad more people don’t use it.


#8

More people don’t use it because… 1. They are not raving mad, foaming at the mouth insane open source zealots. 2. The quality/size of mp3 is fine for everybody with normal hearing. 3. The world runs on mp3s. This includes file sharing services and portable players.


#9

true! i’m sticking with mp3.


#10

For the most part, MP3’s do sound fine, and are the norm, but why wouldn’t you want to save disk space AND have music of higher quality? It makes no since to have an 8 MB file when you can have a 4 MB file with as good or higher quality. Great for file sharing. You have to remember that quality isn’t the only issue. I’m on 56 K dial up. I would like to be able to get a 4 min song in a high quality file half the size of an MP3.


#11

I’m all for the open source movement, don’t get me wrong! I did my own test with a original cd and encoded a wav to mp3 with LAME and the highest quality settings and VBR. Then I did the exact same thing and the files sizes were different. The OGG was typically larger. I’ve got a decent ear for music and I couldn’t decypher any obviously noticable differences in the quality of the music. There is something to take note of, OGG can go higher in bitrate than mp3’s. I thought that maybe my test was too specific. I then encoded a whole cd with LAME HQ VBR and OGG and the OGG rip was “sometimes” smaller in size than the LAME mp3 but not all the time. Compairing the directory sizes with oggs and mp3’s, “most” of the time, the mp3’s added up to less filespace than ogg. One bad thing about mp3 is that the hardware playback devices that I’ve played with, a dvd set-top box and a cd based portable mp3 player couldn’t play back LAME encoded mp3’s flawlessly no matter the bitrate or vbr or cbr. The hardware devices only seemed to like the inferior (IMO) fraunhofer (sp?) mp3 codec. Maybe some of the recent players have adressed this “problem”? What’s your test results from anyone who’s done similar benchmarking?


#12

BTW I did my listening tests with a pair of Sony v600 headphones and a set of klipsche studio monitor speakers. I still couldn’t tell which sounded better. However, I did notice a better sounding file when I replaced the stock decoder in winamp with MAD (mpeg audio decoder). Things sounded “warmer” and more of a “presence” to music when played back. Compairing MAD to the default decoder, the default one made stuff sound "muddier, not as clear and bright, and generally less fidelity.


#13

These guys aren’t exactly sure what they speak of. To get the real skinny from REAL audiophiles, coders, programmers and webmasters, go to http://www.hydrogenaudio.com and see how Vorbis 1.0 REALLY compares to mp3 from a listening and technical standpoint.


#14

Make that http://www.hydrogenaudio.org


#15

Neither .MP3 or .OGG even compares with the Size/Quality of .WMA, the WMA 64 bps is CD qualtiy music, and most MP3 players support it. (yadda yadda I know M$ is evil and all, so what, who cares)


#16

Ogg Vorbis Rocks! It’s all I use now to encode music and movies. It’s not so much open-source as it is (I think) that the company forbids use of digital rights management on this format. MP3, pals, will eventually have DRM with it. and other than the fact that DRM sucks b/c it tells you when you can play it, how many times, etc. It’s slow going thru the authentication process. Ever watch a wmv? Start it up and it takes a few seconds. seek thru the file and it takes forever. Thats DRM for you.


#17

WMA DRM makes me sick. Ogg Vorbis is cool. But with all the MP3’s out there, how are people gonna convince themselves to use it. We need to get together and program a File Sharing program that works with Ogg and put an MP3 To Ogg convertor in it. :slight_smile:


#18

WMA at 64kbps sounds ‘robotic’ and makes a mess at the drums. Real Audio 8 does a better job at this bitrate, MP3Pro captures more treble, but OGG 1.0 final (in most of the original CD tracks I’ve tried) beats the lot. At 64kbps, OGG encoded drums, Guitar and especially voice better than MP3Pro & WMA both at 64kbps, but MP3Pro seemed to encode Piano better. I gave up on WMA as the fluttering sound and ‘metallic’ artifacts were rather annoying. There were even a few tracks that the treble sounded clearer (like the original) in the 64kbps OGG track than the same track encoded in LAME 3.92 (played back on Winamp with MAD plugin). With OGG at 96kbps, I find it difficult to distinguish between it and the original with most music. I done these tests using Winamp 2.80 with the OGG plugin set to 24bit output. The soundcard is a 24bit Soundblaster Audigy connected to large 3 driver 160 watts RMS speakers. :wink: One big drawback with OGG currently is the lack of OGG compatible hardware players and firmware updates for existing players.


#19

Neither .MP3 or .OGG even compares with the Size/Quality of .WMA, the WMA 64 bps is CD qualtiy music, and most MP3 players support it. (yadda yadda I know M$ is evil and all, so what, who cares)
Please tell me you’re kidding, and that you’re not using those god-awful codecs? Even the most zealous microsot lover won’t deny that other codecs are better. (He’ll say "WMA was the best when it came out. It’s too old now. But that’s another discussion for another day.)


#20

I used to use mp3 but switched to WMA because I tested the WMA 64kbps compared to 196kbps mp3 and I couldn’t tell the diffrence. I did also try OGG but it sounded AWFUL! Maybe the encoding is updated and it sounds better now?