Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Is ogg better than mpc now? (Read 7336 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

If you look at the test done with the new analyzing tool ogg scores better than mpc that I thought was the best lossy encoder there is.
So my question is: has ogg beaten mpc or is mpc still the best format around?


Jan.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #1 –
Can't tell without a series of listening tests at various bitrates. But it does seem that Vorbis should be performing very well in the upcoming listening tests. Already lots of people are praising Vorbis at the minimum quality of -q0. It seems quite apparently that Vorbis has the best VBR implementation of any codecs, especially at low bitrates. Quality has almost reached and maybe surpassed that of the best AAC implementation. But still, that is from general feel and doesn't mean much without listening tests.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #2 –
I must add that Liquid Audio AAC and PsyTEL AAC do not use Intensity Stereo, so comparing these codecs with Ogg's Fake Stereo at very low bitrates is somewhat complicated.

I will try to add Intensity Stereo to my codec soon, but this is not at the 'top' priority list right now...

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #3 –
It seems to me I remember mpeg plus having Intensity Stero at one time... Am I mistaken?

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #4 –
Yes it had, but Andree discontinued it because it wasn't useful in a transparent-audio-codec like MP+.

Intensity Stereo (and all other kinds of 'fake' stereo) is a destructive operation desirable at very low bitrates only.

For example, velvet and applaud can't be coded with intensity stereo well. I can upload velvet.aac at 96 kbps, encoded with a commercial codec that uses intensity stereo, and you could hear serious phasing errors.

However, intensity stereo saves up to 40% of bitrate, which means that it could be used for very low bitrates below nominal codec 'sweet spot', sweet spot for MP3 is 112-128 kbps, and for AAC it is around 96 kbps. Below these, IS would improve quality on certain tracks.

Also, it is a matter of 'taste' - some people prefer loss of clear stereo image beyond 6 kHz, and some other people are very sensitive on stereo imaging... Some experiments also show that people especially senistive to pre-echoes are less sensitive to stereo imaging

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #5 –
Ivan, what do you mean by "low bitrate ogg"? Are all the q settings below 5 uses the ogg analogue of Intensity Stereo and all q above 5 are lossless or there is also an analogue of phase-safe lossy coupling like Joint Stereo in Lame?
What's especially interesting for me is the 4,999 setting

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #6 –
Quote
Originally posted by LordCorvin
Ivan, what do you mean by "low bitrate ogg"? Are all the q settings below 5 uses the ogg analogue of Intensity Stereo and all q above 5 are lossless or there is also an analogue of phase-safe lossy coupling like Joint Stereo in Lame? 
What's especially interesting for me is the 4,999 setting


I am not sure what Ogg preset uses what kind of stereo processing (you should ask Monty, or take a quick look at the Ogg code), but at -b 128 mode I've noticed problems with items with strong stereo separation like velvet.wav - and the resulting artifacts were very similar to intensity stereo artifacts.
 

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #7 –
But..........Is ogg better than mp3 right now???

I mean lame mp3???

At what bitrate???

Thanks.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #8 –
No doubt about it.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #9 –
I second that. Ogg is now reaching a stage where further developments, will put it front of the pack. Also at this stage it will become more critical for the developers, to finetune the code and quality of acoustic models to go hand in hand with extensive listening test that WILL be performed by the audio community. Therefore by doing the listening test developers can target areas that are weak (as shown via listening test) and further develop those weak areas.

My prediction for Ogg in the year 2002, is that Ogg will certainly be at the fore front of audio codecs, and with support coming out for portable player, Ogg might just be the replacement codec for the MP3 standard.

Cheers
AgentMil
-=MusePack... Living Audio Compression=-

Honda - The Power of Dreams

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #10 –
Quote
Also at this stage it will become more critical for the developers, to finetune the code and quality of acoustic models to go hand in hand with extensive listening test that WILL be performed by the audio community. Therefore by doing the listening test developers can target areas that are weak (as shown via listening test) and further develop those weak areas.


Well, listening to problem samples is how the codec is currently tuned.  And the Vorbis team has had the input of several very fine ears, including Garf, Dibrom, and Monty himself.

ff123

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #11 –
Ok maybe I was not clear, about what I had said, I meant extensive listening using problems samples as well as albums from different genres, that will provide us with a large sample base for which the results that are gather are true to what we are going to encode using the codec, not every sample is like fatboy and fixing the problem in fatboy doesn't normally guarantee that other problem will be fixed, that may exist in other songs, therefore an extensive and intensive listening test is the only way to go, to iron out the little problems that may occur. Also people like yourself ff123 (your webpage is very informational and accurate THANKS!!), Dibrom, Garf and the developers of these codecs (you know who you are) who continously provide quality feedback to developer and the users who use the codec, all helps in fixing up the little problems that may exist.

SORRY If I wasn't clear on that point
-=MusePack... Living Audio Compression=-

Honda - The Power of Dreams

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #12 –
Quote
Originally posted by ff123


Well, listening to problem samples is how the codec is currently tuned.  And the Vorbis team has had the input of several very fine ears, including Garf, Dibrom, and Monty himself.

ff123


More importantly, the Vorbis developers actually listen to the input of those fine ears and work with them.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #13 –
Yes that is why I think Ogg will be the next best thing in the Audio community, becuase of the feedback that they provide and the fact they act on the feedback of the community.
-=MusePack... Living Audio Compression=-

Honda - The Power of Dreams

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #14 –
But how does the quality compare to mpc?
And should you change to ogg in the future if you want best quality?


Thanks for all the feedback.
Jan.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #15 –
Like someone already said - serious listening test will be required to be certain what sounds better. But this might require official Vorbis 1.0 release.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #16 –
here's what I don't get.  If mpc is just simply hands down the best lossy encoder there is... then why are there people even still working their ass's off to make another encoder that they know never will match mpc's quality?  why push to make ogg popular when it's quality isn't even the best?  why not spend all your time and efforts to try and push mpc to the masses?

I mean, ogg is popular, but just enought to have a good number of people to know of it... so obviously a hell of alot of more work into it's promoting and marketing is in order to make it well known by even novices, so why not spend all that time and effort to promot the encoder even ogg's makers know is better?

p.s.    Hi.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #17 –
MPC is closed.

And I believe that's a hell of a good reason.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #18 –
mpc is better now but a lot of ppl think that ogg will in the future have the same quality as mpc at a lower bitrate.


Jan.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #19 –
Quote
Originally posted by SNYder
here's what I don't get.  If mpc is just simply hands down the best lossy encoder there is... then why are there people even still working their ass's off to make another encoder that they know never will match mpc's quality?  why push to make ogg popular when it's quality isn't even the best?  why not spend all your time and efforts to try and push mpc to the masses?
Some reasons:
-Vorbis is totally free (no licencsing, totally open source)
-Very good lowbitrate quality (MPC is no low bitrate codec)
-Streaming and bitrate peeling
-Very high quality overall

There's definitely a good chance it will match MPC quality at higher bitrate in the future. It's already quite close.
Juha Laaksonheimo

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #20 –
Quote
Vorbis is totally free (no licencsing, totally open source)
-Very good lowbitrate quality (MPC is no low bitrate codec)
-Streaming and bitrate peeling
-Very high quality overall 
  And most of all, NO PATENT NAZIS! BTW, bitrate peeling is an awesome concept. Imagine encoding ONCE, at the highest quality, and later peeling it down to whatever bitrate you want for filesharing or portables. Never rip again! What a cool idea...

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #21 –
Quote
Originally posted by layer3maniac
  And most of all, NO PATENT NAZIS!


Please be a little more careful about the use of the word "Nazis". I'd appreciate it.

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #22 –
Quote
Originally posted by CiTay


Please be a little more careful about the use of the word "Nazis". I'd appreciate it.


Can we use the word "Republicans" instead?

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #23 –
"Talibans" 

Is ogg better than mpc now?

Reply #24 –
Quote
Originally posted by rjamorim
"Talibans" 


[nitpick]The word "taliban" is a plural form of "talib" which can be translated as "a student".[/nitpick]

This is starting to get "a little" OT.