IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Help to convert Mp3 to OGG
cobrakai
post Jul 29 2003, 14:21
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 32
Joined: 29-July 03
Member No.: 8065



I have 7gb of mp3, all above 192kbps.....i want to convert them to OGG 144kbps

Im using Easy cd creator 6 audio central, but is being long a lot....about 20 minutes to convert a entire cd.....this is normal ???

I already tried Sound forge 6, and the conversion also delay a lot

The conversion for OGG format is slow naturally, or i can use another better program to speed up this process ???

My system is:

P4 2.56ghz, 512mb ddr400, Sound blaster Audigy

Thanks for any help
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
fragtal
post Jul 29 2003, 14:26
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 274
Joined: 1-January 03
From: Old Europe
Member No.: 4353



listen to this:

http://home.t-online.de/home/frank-bicking/heehee.ogg © Emmett Plant

and rethink about transcoding smile.gif. [transcoding = death]

or can you give me a good reason why you want to do that?

EDIT: thanks Frank for hosting that file smile.gif

This post has been edited by fragtal: Jul 29 2003, 14:29


--------------------
I love the moderators.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
cobrakai
post Jul 29 2003, 14:41
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 32
Joined: 29-July 03
Member No.: 8065



I noticed that OGG at 144kbps has more quality and smaller size than my mp3.

Is that wrong ??

Ok, just in case....which is the best program to convert a mp3 to OGG format ???

And to make ogg from CD ??


Thanks for any explanation
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
verloren
post Jul 29 2003, 14:55
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 156
Joined: 28-March 02
From: Hants, UK
Member No.: 1637



QUOTE (cobrakai @ Jul 29 2003, 07:41 AM)
I noticed that OGG at 144kbps has more quality and smaller size than my mp3.

Is that wrong ??

A 144 Ogg might have higher quality than a 192 mp3, but not if it was created from the mp3 - that would mean it was accurately creating detail that wasn't in the mp3 to begin with, which is unlikely!

Cheers, Paul
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bennyboyamo
post Jul 29 2003, 15:29
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 37
Joined: 15-February 03
From: England
Member No.: 5005



QUOTE (cobrakai @ Jul 29 2003, 05:41 AM)
I noticed that OGG at 144kbps has more quality and smaller size than my mp3.

Is that wrong ??

Ok, just in case....which is the best program to convert a mp3 to OGG format ???

And to make ogg from CD ??


Thanks for any explanation

CDex is good for CD to OGG

This post has been edited by bennyboyamo: Jul 29 2003, 15:30
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DonP
post Jul 29 2003, 15:59
Post #6





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1469
Joined: 11-February 03
From: Vermont
Member No.: 4955



QUOTE (cobrakai @ Jul 29 2003, 08:41 AM)
And to make ogg from CD ??

That depends on what operating system you use.
On Linux, I use grip, which is a front end using cdparanoia to rip and oggenc to
encode. This is included in at least a few linux distributions.

On WindowsXP I use dbPoweramp music converter (www.dbpoweramp.com

This can also convert mp3 to ogg if you have to, but you have been warned
about the quality loss inherent in converting between 2 lossy formats.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ilikedirtthe2nd
post Jul 29 2003, 16:05
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 470
Joined: 26-October 01
From: Germany
Member No.: 352



QUOTE (fragtal @ Jul 29 2003, 01:26 PM)

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hannes
post Aug 25 2003, 20:22
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 20-August 03
Member No.: 8440



Hi,

another good programm to convert music files is "ace-high mp3 wav wma ogg converter". but you can only download a trial version, otherwise you have to pay for it...

Regards Hannes
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
music_man_mpc
post Aug 25 2003, 21:30
Post #9





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 707
Joined: 20-July 03
From: Canada
Member No.: 7895



QUOTE (cobrakai @ Jul 29 2003, 05:21 AM)
I have 7gb of mp3, all above 192kbps.....i want to convert them to OGG 144kbps

Im using Easy cd creator 6 audio central, but is being long a lot....about 20 minutes to convert a entire cd.....this is normal ???

I already tried Sound forge 6, and the conversion also delay a lot

The conversion for OGG format is slow naturally, or i can use another better program to speed up this process ???

My system is:

P4 2.56ghz, 512mb ddr400, Sound blaster Audigy

Thanks for any help

First of all transcoding = BAD. Keep your mp3s the way they are, they will only sound worse as Oggs. I think as far as going CD - Ogg. Most people on this site would agree that (under Windows) EAC is the best ripping program, and the best Ogg encoder for a n00b is probably oggdropXPd GT3b1 (I suggest either -q5 or -q6).
However MusePack is commonly seen as being better than Ogg in terms of quality, here is the encoder and a frontend.

edit: and here are some detailed instructions for encoding in Musepack format.

I hope you find this useful.

This post has been edited by music_man_mpc: Aug 25 2003, 21:34


--------------------
gentoo ~amd64 + layman | ncmpcpp/mpd | wavpack + vorbis + lame
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kotrtim
post Aug 26 2003, 08:42
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 657
Joined: 4-December 02
Member No.: 3989



DON'T TRANSCODE
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lyvyoo
post Jun 13 2006, 12:33
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 6-June 06
Member No.: 31508



But is possible obtain more quality writing the mp3 on a audio cd and rip this cd in ogg format with EAC????????
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kjoonlee
post Jun 13 2006, 12:37
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 2526
Joined: 25-July 02
From: South Korea
Member No.: 2782



No.


--------------------
http://blacksun.ivyro.net/vorbis/vorbisfaq.htm
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ryran
post Jun 13 2006, 14:04
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 33
Joined: 24-December 03
From: Charlotte NC USA
Member No.: 10664



QUOTE (kjoonlee @ Jun 13 2006, 07:37) *
No.
ROTFL.... ya gotta give Lyvyoo credit though for using the search function to dig this up. hahaha.

For posterity, since this thread is from 2003: if you're looking for a faster way to encode to ogg, check out lancer, a speed optimized build.

This post has been edited by ryran: Jun 13 2006, 14:07
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gameplaya15143
post Jun 14 2006, 00:53
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 484
Joined: 8-January 06
From: Earth
Member No.: 26978



dBpowerAMP
install the regular ogg vorbis plugin and the aoTuV b4 plugin
replace that version of aoTuV with the latest lancer

sit back, and watch it go cool.gif


--------------------
Vorbis-q0-lowpass99
lame3.93.1-q5-V9-k-nspsytune
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
cahklowor
post Jun 14 2006, 01:09
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 4-May 06
Member No.: 30379



rolleyes.gif Transcode means you will not get ogg file that better than your mp3. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Lyvyoo
post Jun 14 2006, 10:39
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 6-June 06
Member No.: 31508



Yes, but if you want to hear the new ogg files on a mobile phone i think is a good ideea! The ogg files is small and on Nokia 6680 you don't feel a big diference, compare with the original mp3!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pepoluan
post Jun 16 2006, 12:18
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 1455
Joined: 22-November 05
From: Jakarta
Member No.: 25929



Ogg sounds good if the source is original or lossless. If original is MP3, it all depends on the song itself. Trust me, I've been there. Sometimes it works (i.e. transcoding to Vorbis did not cause audible degradation), sometimes it doesn't work.

The tool I use is WinLame. MediaCoder and dBPowerAmp and foobar2000 can also do the trick. Take your poison smile.gif

Hmm... there's a good analogy... I read it somewhere, but I forgot where. It goes like this:

When you encode lossily (e.g. with MP3), consider it like cutting the ends of a bread loaf, then stomping on the bread so it becomes smaller. But part of the bread is gone.

When you transcode into something else (e.g. to Vorbis), you puff up the bread, cut off a different part of the bread, and then stomp on it again. The bread is smaller, but some part has been irretrievably lost during first encode.

I think this analogy comes from a HA-member... please tell me who, and I'll put in the proper credit.


--------------------
Nobody is Perfect.
I am Nobody.

http://pandu.poluan.info
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Tonio Roffo
post Jun 22 2006, 08:41
Post #18





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 22-June 06
Member No.: 32109



So...

1. Compression basically "rounds" frequency components that are masked by others
2. When using near-transparent compression (let's say Ogg Q7 for example), the noise added instead of the original frequencies should be well below the hearing threshold, right? Else we would be able to ABX is easily.
3. Recompressing this near transparent source again (transcoding to MP3 for example) shouldn't be looking at the introduced noise, since it should be below the threshold set in the psychoacoustic model??

So why is transcoding bad? The way I look at it is

* It shouldn't be bad when using transparent or near-transparent encodings
* When recompressing at a certain bitrate, quality will surely be less than when the source was PCM
* When in "overkill" (choose 2 compressors & bitrates over your ABXable threshold) it should be very difficult to hear?

Please explain me why my way of thinking is bad, as most ppl here surely have more experience with compression than I have.

Or more to the point, have there been ABX tests from high-bitrate oggs to high-bitrate mp3's (or reverse)

I'd like to do some myself (checked out ABX in foobar) but my computer sound system doesn't nearly have the resolution or noise-free environment my main system has.

Reason I'm asking all this?

The infamous allofmp3.com site - lately they offer compressed audio *but* from the PCM source (only latest recordings) - I tend to buy my tracks in Ogg Q7 (should be *way* above my transparancy threshold, and when playing with extreme low bitrates, the obvious compression is much more pleasing to the ear than the metallic sounding MP3's at the extreme low bitrates) - Now, for my car audio I'd love to transcode these to MP3's.

Furthermore, older allofmp3.com tracks are freeform 384kb MP3 tracks - which you can't DL directly < wrong!

PS. Seems I was wrong! - in Allofmp3.com you can choose "expert mode", and looking at the MP3's it is indicated "384kb MP3 - original encoding"

This post has been edited by Tonio Roffo: Jun 22 2006, 08:46
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
miikrr
post Jun 22 2006, 10:28
Post #19





Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 22-June 06
Member No.: 32112



Transcoding removes even further information from the audio and can also introduce more noticable artifacts.

This post has been edited by miikrr: Jun 22 2006, 10:29
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pepoluan
post Jun 23 2006, 13:59
Post #20





Group: Members
Posts: 1455
Joined: 22-November 05
From: Jakarta
Member No.: 25929



Everytime you encode lossily, you throw out some details. When it is decoded, the details is filled in approximately, which means that the decoded result is never identical to the original source.

Re-encoding, even to the same codec, will throw out some details, again. But since the wave is now different, it is extremely likely that whatever is thrown out the second time will not be the same as what is thrown out the first time.

Sometimes re-encoding the approximate reconstructed wave to a different codec does not degrade it too much. Guruboolez did an MP3 transcoding test once upon a time. Can someone post the link for me?

But still, there's bound to be more stuff thrown out the second time. Keep transcoding, and you'll end up with a track where virtually all original nuances have been thrown out, and you end up with a very approximated wave that somehow resembles the original in some way...


--------------------
Nobody is Perfect.
I am Nobody.

http://pandu.poluan.info
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jun 23 2006, 14:27
Post #21





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (pepoluan @ Jun 23 2006, 14:59) *
Guruboolez did an MP3 transcoding test once upon a time. Can someone post the link for me?


http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....topic=32440&hl=
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Tonio Roffo
post Jun 24 2006, 10:31
Post #22





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 22-June 06
Member No.: 32109



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jun 23 2006, 15:27) *
QUOTE (pepoluan @ Jun 23 2006, 14:59) *
Guruboolez did an MP3 transcoding test once upon a time. Can someone post the link for me?


http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....topic=32440&hl=


The posted test is also very nice to see how good the original codec was - OGG > MP3 had a very good result, meaning that an OGG wave must approximate the original wave very much, and not only perception based but also mathematically.

Maybe it's because the 2 codecs are very different in their inner workings to start with!

I only need OGG > MP3 to playback my bought music in the MP3 car player - high noise levels will mask out a lot, so as long as there are no obvious introduced artifacts I'm happy - slightly "different sounding" doesn't matter.

Then something else - we're always decoding to wav and re-encoding here - but how about something like in video transcoding? Changing MP3 bitrates the way that DVDshrink and such work? I believe it's called requantization? - searched a bit - it's transcoding in the compressed domain, by "droppping (requantizing) DCT coefficients. Don't know if anything like this is present in MP3.

Thanks for that link!

PS. Bitrate peeling would be cool if it ever got announced.

This post has been edited by Tonio Roffo: Jun 24 2006, 10:48
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
psycho
post Jun 24 2006, 18:59
Post #23





Group: Members
Posts: 241
Joined: 14-October 05
Member No.: 25099



QUOTE (Tonio Roffo @ Jun 24 2006, 11:31) *
PS. Bitrate peeling would be cool if it ever got announced.


Do you have something like this in mind? wink.gif


--------------------
lame -V 0
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Tonio Roffo
post Jun 24 2006, 19:44
Post #24





Group: Members
Posts: 9
Joined: 22-June 06
Member No.: 32109



QUOTE (psycho @ Jun 24 2006, 19:59) *
QUOTE (Tonio Roffo @ Jun 24 2006, 11:31) *

PS. Bitrate peeling would be cool if it ever got announced.


Do you have something like this in mind? wink.gif


That's some nice stuff!! cheers! - however I'd like to see MP3 (or other format) transcoders that work in the compressed domain only (a la MPEG2 video transcoders)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
...Just Elliott
post Sep 13 2006, 20:48
Post #25





Group: Members
Posts: 446
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 34002



HINT: Highlight his post. Hidden lines, ooo.


--------------------
err... i'm not using windows any more ;)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 16th April 2014 - 18:58