Why is opus only good at 64/kbs Options

[Warning]

So I was very skeptical about opus when it sounded like a new OGG Vorbis hype where the codec is both free and crappy quality. I didn't think without SBR it would be able to compete with Nero HE-AAC. So I compared at different bitrates and opus always sounded worse. I decided to ABX at different bitrates, opus failed on 32 and 48 but not 64 where the treble was audibly brighter than Nero.

Ok you got me convinced that opus sounds better at 64 kb/s, why does it suck so bad at other bitrates? Also, why didn't you guys include WMA in your listening test along with opus? WMA has proven to be slightly superior quality to HE-AAC at 64 kb/s so maybe opus still has a competitor.

Also, fix your biased testing methodology and keep the bitrates as close as possible to the original! Jesus. My hypothetical codec produces output bitrates of 192 kb/s when my quality setting intends it to be half as less, I demand it to be nominated as capable of transparency at 16 kb/s.
Your unscientific results makes me keep clear of your website these days.

[Warning]

http://www.sendspace.com/file/x4ec7d

AAC and opus at 32 kb/s VBR but both ended up at the exact same filesize. I'd include original wav but didn't feel like uploading 25MB so it's compressed at -q 0.75 and I think qualifies well enough as the original.

You don't even need to ABX to hear what complete shit opus sounds like with this sample. HE-AAC sounds almost transparent, though I'm sure an ABX would help me notice the flaws.

To the best of my knowledge, opus is not related to USAC which is emerging as the next future standard in audio to succeed AAC which I guess means opus will eventually be trashed by superior quality like OGG was by AAC and I hope it does.

EDIT: saratoga, re-read my post. Given your obvious trolling, you're on ignore.

This post has been edited by Warning: Jan 27 2013, 01:13

[db1989]

You don't even need to ABX to hear what complete shit opus sounds like with this sample. HE-AAC sounds almost transparent

Aside from your usual exaggerated language, I agree with both of these points. So? It’s one sample. I’d like to think you’ve compared Opus with other codecs across a very broad range of samples and types of material to arrive at your current, authoritatively marketed conclusion.

And anyway, what is the ultimate purpose of this? ‘I don’t like Opus at these very low bitrates, therefore it should be abolished immediately; if you still don’t believe me, listen to this barrage of insults, and PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO ME’

Whether you like it or not, many people want and will support a forward-looking open codec. Perhaps you should either ignore it or change your approach to aid its development constructively rather than continuing this apparent vendetta.

Or, if you don’t want to do that, I’m sure there are other sites where you can be consoled by others with a similar grudge; here, you’ll probably just get more frustrated, and something tells me you don’t need any more of that.

No one will refuse constructive feedback. But you have to approach it that way. You can’t just storm in and insult everyone and expect people to consider the finer aspects of what you’re saying. See how much delay that caused?

This post has been edited by db1989: Jan 27 2013, 01:31