Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Which Encoder for -Q 7?
Hydrogenaudio Forums > Lossy Audio Compression > Ogg Vorbis > Ogg Vorbis - General
Jack Comics
All the different various encoders for Ogg Vorbis have me confused. Which would be considered the "best" in general for -q 7? Thanks!
QuantumKnot
Good question. Tough one to answer. I think most of the problems with Vorbis disappear above q 6. So I'd probably say either GT3b2 or aoTuV.
maroonmike
aoTuV for q 7?? I thought it was only optimized for q values of 5 or less? unsure.gif

Also, is there any chance to get aoTuV incorporated into OggDrop as a replacement for 1.01 (and still use GT3b2 for the high q values?) That would be sweet.
harashin
QUOTE(maroonmike @ Apr 27 2004, 02:28 AM)
aoTuV for q 7??  I thought it was only optimized for q values of 5 or less?  unsure.gif

I think Aoyumi has tuned his encoder for all bitrate range as he said;
QUOTE(aoTuV official site)
Beta1_a >> Beta2
The problem to which the sound of a specific range becomes large was reduced.
Tuning was improved in all bit rate regions.

QUOTE
Also, is there any chance to get aoTuV incorporated into OggDrop as a replacement for 1.01 (and still use GT3b2 for the high q values?)  That would be sweet.

You can use aoTuVdropXPd which is originally from this site and is changed its resource into English by me.
maroonmike
Thanks harashin.

Do you know if anyone has done any listening tests on aoTuV vs. GT3b2 at q 7?
kjoonlee
QUOTE(Jack Comics @ Apr 26 2004, 10:43 AM)
All the different various encoders for Ogg Vorbis have me confused.  Which would be considered the "best" in general for -q 7?  Thanks!

I'd vote for the one which creates transparent files for you at the smallest sizes.

IMHO only you and noone else will be qualified to make the decision.
eagleray
At the higher bit rates you have to be a very good listener to tell these encoders apart. I can not do it on an ABX of regular music, but I have never tried the "problem" tracks that are used by some HA members.

The successful ABX'ers have trained themselves to hear artifacts. Once you do that it forces you to raise your standards, one reason why I have not attempted to train my hearing. I want to enjoy music, not disect it.

On the GTB encoders the files are larger at these higher q settings. A Vorbis 1.01 post cvs might produce a 180k bitrate file with -q 6 while GTB makes the same bitrate with -q 5.5 or possibly an even lower -q. Some say even at the same bitrate GTB sounds better, but I am unable to tell.

While this will not tell you which of two codecs is better, if you can listen to tracks encoded at a particular bitrate and codec for long periods of time without becomming dissatisfied, that is a good indication everything is working right.
maroonmike
QUOTE
You can use aoTuVdropXPd which is originally from this site and is changed its resource into English by me.


harashin, the zip file for you English version does not work. It comes up as an invalid archive. Can you check this out? I would like to get a copy. Thanks.
Dologan
I found no such problem with the zip, maroonmike. Did you wait for it to download completely?
harashin
QUOTE(maroonmike @ Apr 27 2004, 03:34 AM)
Do you know if anyone has done any listening tests on aoTuV  vs. GT3b2 at q 7?

Dunno, and I probably can't ABX both codecs on any other samples than "special" ones like castanets, rosemary, Hosokawa___Atem_lied, etc. Also, ABXing between GT3 and aoTuV at -q7 will be much harder than between GT3/aoTuV and the original.
QUOTE
harashin, the zip file for you English version does not work. It comes up as an invalid archive. Can you check this out? I would like to get a copy. Thanks.

Please try again. If you won't be able to get it next time, I'll upload it at uploader of HA.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.