IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Vorbis quality wrong direction?, RC3 against post-final encoder
harashin
post Feb 22 2004, 08:54
Post #51





Group: Members
Posts: 339
Joined: 20-February 02
From: Kyoto, Japan
Member No.: 1362



The Modest Tuning Beta2 won my own test. Apparently it's superior to other Vorbis encoders on this kind of sample. (sharp attack, symbal)
Although aoTuV b1 is also thinkable as a good choice for its reasonable bitrate.


--------------------
Folding@Home Hydrogenaudio.org Team ID# 32639
http://folding.stanford.edu/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
music_man_mpc
post Feb 22 2004, 17:45
Post #52





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



QUOTE (nyaochi @ Feb 21 2004, 11:36 PM)
However, it was not so good because the average bitrate of MTb2 is too high (around 160-170kbps).

Perhaps next time you could compare it to 1.01 -q5 as well? Results would be interesting, IMO.


--------------------
gentoo ~amd64 + layman | ncmpcpp/mpd | wavpack + vorbis + lame
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Feb 23 2004, 00:39
Post #53





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



It certainly is surprising that lossless coupling is doing so badly compared with uncoupled. Theoretically, you'd expect they should be the same! blink.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
harashin
post Feb 23 2004, 07:40
Post #54





Group: Members
Posts: 339
Joined: 20-February 02
From: Kyoto, Japan
Member No.: 1362



QUOTE (QuantumKnot @ Feb 23 2004, 08:39 AM)
It certainly is surprising that lossless coupling is doing so badly compared with uncoupled.  Theoretically, you'd expect they should be the same!  blink.gif

Indeed, it's very odd. However, I was able to ABX between LC and UC with score at 15/20. Also, they don't actually seem to be same.

lc_uc.png


--------------------
Folding@Home Hydrogenaudio.org Team ID# 32639
http://folding.stanford.edu/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Feb 24 2004, 03:18
Post #55





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



QUOTE (harashin @ Feb 23 2004, 04:40 PM)
QUOTE (QuantumKnot @ Feb 23 2004, 08:39 AM)
It certainly is surprising that lossless coupling is doing so badly compared with uncoupled.  Theoretically, you'd expect they should be the same!  blink.gif

Indeed, it's very odd. However, I was able to ABX between LC and UC with score at 15/20. Also, they don't actually seem to be same.

lc_uc.png

Monty made a good point in IRC that this is to be expected since compilers do random things to FP computations smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Feb 14 2005, 16:59
Post #56





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



...One year later

Just for curiosity, I've tried another comparison, using the same samples, in order to check vorbis's progress during three years, and especially during the last one.
I kept vorbis RC3 (march 2002), vorbis 1.01 (march 2003), and add the most advanced vorbis encoder: aoTuV beta 3. I'd like to check the amount of noise/coarseness audible with aoTuV compared to an old encoder which wasn't too affected by this problem.

results:



ABX log/scores are here.

There are still audible issues with aoTuV at this bitrate, but they are much lower than vorbis RC3. One exception: the last sample, which RC3 performed differently (and to my ears: better) on brass (micro-attacks sample).
Bravo to Aoyumi!

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Dec 29 2005, 22:18
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DreamTactix291
post Feb 15 2005, 07:26
Post #57





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 552
Joined: 9-June 04
From: A place long since forgotten...
Member No.: 14572



Wow. That is some nice improvement.

It looks like aoTuV is pushing Vorbis in the right direction instead of regressing it biggrin.gif


--------------------
Nero AAC 1.5.1.0: -q0.45
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Aoyumi
post Feb 16 2005, 15:01
Post #58





Group: Members
Posts: 236
Joined: 14-January 04
From: Kanto, Japan
Member No.: 11215



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Feb 15 2005, 12:59 AM)
There are still audible issues with aoTuV at this bitrate, but they are much lower than vorbis RC3. One exception: the last sample, which RC3 performed differently (and to my ears: better) on brass (micro-attacks sample).
*


The handling of a micro attack is one of the big subjects truly.

I know that QuantumKnot is performing the trial for solving this problem.
Probably, I am looking forward to it. tongue.gif

This post has been edited by Aoyumi: Feb 16 2005, 15:09
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
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 - 18:43