aoTuVb2 Encoder, Archiving audio with aoTuVb2 encoder |
![]() ![]() |
aoTuVb2 Encoder, Archiving audio with aoTuVb2 encoder |
Jul 11 2004, 11:56
Post
#1
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 202 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Malaysia Member No.: 15210 |
I know currently the aoTuVb2 encoder is the best one, but the aoTuV"b2" mean it is beta 2 isn't it? Should i use the beta encoder to archive audio?
|
|
|
|
Jul 11 2004, 12:03
Post
#2
|
|
![]() Group: Members (Donating) Posts: 3474 Joined: 7-November 01 From: Strasbourg (France) Member No.: 420 |
WMA, Blade, Plugger, VQF are not beta, but it's not a reason to use it. On the other side, most MPC encoders are beta, and quality is fine.
aoTuV was tested by some members of the community. It's a great improvement, compared to "stable and final" 1.01. It's safe to use it, though it's in beta stage. For archiving, I nevertheless suggest to take a look on the "megamix" version, merging aoTuV code with GT3b2 and QK32, and allowing in consequence better transients (less pre-echo, more sharpness). You could also take a look on CVS encoder 1.1. It's in Release Candidate (RC) stage, one step behind on safety compared to simple "beta" |
|
|
|
Jul 12 2004, 00:47
Post
#3
|
|
![]() Group: Developer Posts: 1245 Joined: 16-December 02 From: Australia Member No.: 4097 |
Such is the rapid state of Vorbis development now, with 1.1 RC1 out just a week or two after Megamix, I wonder if I should do a Megamix 2 based on this new 1.1 RC1 or should I wait for the final 1.1 version to be released? The only benefit I see is to have bitrate management working properly, as well as some bugfixes. But the big disadvantage I see with this is that I will be effectively adding another version of Vorbis on top of the many we already have, that will cause a lot of confusion.
|
|
|
|
Jul 12 2004, 00:50
Post
#4
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 29 Joined: 3-May 04 Member No.: 13854 |
Wait. Probably won't be much longer until 1.1 final.
|
|
|
|
Jul 12 2004, 02:25
Post
#5
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 1593 Joined: 24-March 02 From: Revere, MA Member No.: 1607 |
QUOTE (QuantumKnot @ Jul 11 2004, 07:47 PM) Such is the rapid state of Vorbis development now, with 1.1 RC1 out just a week or two after Megamix, I wonder if I should do a Megamix 2 based on this new 1.1 RC1 or should I wait for the final 1.1 version to be released? The only benefit I see is to have bitrate management working properly, as well as some bugfixes. But the big disadvantage I see with this is that I will be effectively adding another version of Vorbis on top of the many we already have, that will cause a lot of confusion. As if it hasn't already hehe. Nothing is ever perefect though you try and that's what count's ;-). Should be a full time job tweaking Vorbis encoder on problematic samples. -------------------- College student/IT Assistant
|
|
|
|
Jul 12 2004, 03:19
Post
#6
|
|
![]() Group: Members Posts: 488 Joined: 8-October 02 From: Vrilissia, Athens Member No.: 3503 |
The term "archiving" usually suggests lossless or
high bitrate encodes, and AFAIC aoTuVb2 shines at the lower bitrates. Shouldn't you be sticking to to GT3b2 (if vorbis is your choice for archiving) at least until newer encoder versions e.g. 1.1 are thoroughly tested? -------------------- Wanna buy a monkey?
|
|
|
|
Jul 12 2004, 07:16
Post
#7
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 306 Joined: 18-April 04 Member No.: 13571 |
GT3b2 is also Beta.
For archival, I'd rather do lossless, but if you want officially stable Vorbis, go with Xiph's 1.0.1. |
|
|
|
Jul 12 2004, 07:46
Post
#8
|
|
![]() Group: Banned Posts: 27 Joined: 8-July 04 Member No.: 15155 |
Well, will 1.1 be same quality as aoTuVb2? I mean - ALL tunings added? Anything else (tunings!) added?
|
|
|
|
Jul 13 2004, 11:57
Post
#9
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 202 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Malaysia Member No.: 15210 |
Ok, i will wait until 1.1 final.
Another question, is somebody know the ogg vorbis(aoTuVb2 or 1.0.1 version) each bandwidth for each bitrate?(Sorry, my english is very bad (example: 128kbps, the bandwidth is xxxxxHz and so on), or where can i get those information? Thanks for everybody who join in this topic. This post has been edited by yong: Jul 13 2004, 12:00 -------------------- http://foobar2000.xrea.jp/
|
|
|
|
Jul 13 2004, 12:04
Post
#10
|
|
![]() Group: Members (Donating) Posts: 3474 Joined: 7-November 01 From: Strasbourg (France) Member No.: 420 |
EDIT: wrong comprehension of the question. This post has been edited by guruboolez: Jul 13 2004, 12:42 |
|
|
|
Jul 13 2004, 12:32
Post
#11
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 2 Joined: 13-July 04 Member No.: 15401 |
QUOTE (yong @ Jul 13 2004, 11:57 AM) Another question, is somebody know the ogg vorbis(aoTuVb2 or 1.0.1 version) each bandwidth for each bitrate? for aotuvb2: q-2 13,90012 khz q-1 15,1 khz q0 15,10007 khz q1 15,80007 khz q2 16,50007 khz q3 17,20017 khz q4 18,90012 khz q5 20,10279 khz q6 48,095327 khz q7-10 999,0 khz |
|
|
|
Jul 13 2004, 12:59
Post
#12
|
|
![]() xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer Group: Developer Posts: 3706 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Bracknell, UK Member No.: 111 |
QUOTE (analogy @ Jul 12 2004, 06:16 AM) GT3b2 is also Beta. For archival, I'd rather do lossless, but if you want officially stable Vorbis, go with Xiph's 1.0.1. FYI, Monty has always stated that the latest committed source code is the most stable; that would be 1.1RC1. -------------------- John
---------------------------------------------------------------- My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/ |
|
|
|
Jul 14 2004, 11:53
Post
#13
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 202 Joined: 9-July 04 From: Malaysia Member No.: 15210 |
Sorry for guruboolez, cause i let him misunderstand...
And thanks for sciller answer my question! -------------------- http://foobar2000.xrea.jp/
|
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 21st May 2013 - 01:56 |