Sorry I think I missed something...

libvorbis is now 1.1.2 ? how does it relate to aoTuVb4.51 ?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=348770"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

libvorbis 1.1.2 (2005-11-27) -- "Xiph.Org libVorbis I 20050304"
* fix a serious encoder bug with gcc 4 optimized builds
* documentation and spec fixes
* updated VS2003 and XCode builds
* new draft RTP encapsulation spec

Quote

Sorry I think I missed something...

libvorbis is now 1.1.2 ? how does it relate to aoTuVb4.51 ?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=348770"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

libvorbis 1.1.2 is the official Vorbis library coming out from Xiph.Org that is mostly based on the old aoTuV beta 2.  aoTuV beta 4.5 is Aoyumi's tuned version of libvorbis (based on libvorbis 1.1.1).
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=348793"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This versions support 5.1 channel coupling? or is just the correct way to output each channels in the correct order?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=349774"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Sooooo...  let me get this straight:

Xiph 1.1.2 is a bugfix of Xiph 1.1.1 which incorporates aoTuVb2.

aoTuVb4.51 is a bugfix of aoTuVb4.5 which is an improvement of aoTuVb4 which -ultimately- is based on Xiph 1.1.1.

aoTuVb4.51 already incorporates the bugfixes of Xiph 1.1.2.

So in conclusion: I should be using the aoTuVb4.51.

Am I reading this correctly? 
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=349813"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

and I also noticed QuantumKnot recommends the aoTuVb version in his Recommended Encoder Versions and Settings thread...Why? What makes this version so special above the libVorbis version?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=350099"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

aoTuV beta 4 Now the recommended encoder

Developed by Aoyumi and based on libvorbis 1.1.1, many people have reported this encoder to give better quality at low to medium bitrates. It includes a -q -2 option for the lowest bitrate. According to guruboolez' latest listening test on classical music, aoTuV beta 4 performed magnificently well at -q 6!!

Haven't you noticed QuantumKnot's explanation in the same thread?

Quote

aoTuV beta 4 Now the recommended encoder

Developed by Aoyumi and based on libvorbis 1.1.1, many people have reported this encoder to give better quality at low to medium bitrates. It includes a -q -2 option for the lowest bitrate. According to guruboolez' latest listening test on classical music, aoTuV beta 4 performed magnificently well at -q 6!!

[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=350105"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

So in conclusion: I should be using the aoTuVb4.51.
Am I reading this correctly? 
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Quote

So in conclusion: I should be using the aoTuVb4.51.
Am I reading this correctly? 
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No, latest [a href="http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index_e.htm]Lancer[/url]

sarcastic note: those 'yellows' (Japaneses) are great ! 
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=350756"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I somewhere read it "may" produce different results due to its optimisations. Is there a degraded example documented?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=350768"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Quote

I somewhere read it "may" produce different results due to its optimisations. Is there a degraded example documented?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=350768"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If you're unsure about the result, do the following:

a) choose a sample and encode it with oggenc (let's call it sample A);
b) encode that sample with lancer (sample B);
c) open both of them with a sound editor;
d) flip/invert one of them;
e) mix them (by this operation, you subtract A form B, or vice versa depending on which one you've flipped; the result will be identical);
f) see if there is something left (there shouldn't; if both encodings are identical).

Cheers.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=350838"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ah this question I had asked previously in this thread.

Basically, the answer is like this:

Lancer uses SSE, and this rounds off floating point numbers differently than the, um, plain aoTuVb4.51.

However, despite the differences, I have tried them both and to my ears they sound the same.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=351106"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Lancer uses SSE, and this rounds off floating point numbers differently than the, um, plain aoTuVb4.51.

However, despite the differences, I have tried them both and to my ears they sound the same.