|
|
#1 |
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 87
|
Encoding Quality Question
Sup y'all I was just wondering what bitrate would be the equivalent
lossless or cd quality in the MP3, OGG, and AAC codecs. I trying to decide what codec to use in archiving my cds. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Rudolf the Red.
(Forum King) Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 9,315
|
I use ogg at -q7 which is, to my ears the same as a CD played on my pretty good hi-fi. I'd definatly reccomend ogg over MP3 for archive purposes. It also depends how many discs you want to make of you archives. You might prefer -q8 oggs, although I very much doubt you'll hear the differance, especially if you're using PC speakers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum King
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Thoron fields and Duranium shadows. Posts: Crap mostly
Posts: 7,960
|
MP3, is fine at higher bitrates, but is much bigger filewise at that quality.
OGG, Much better than MP3 in terms of sound quality and compresion, but as of yet can oly be played by a few players, or those with the correct plugins/what ever they use. AAC, no idea |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum King
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hawarden
Posts: 2,115
|
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org
For archival purposes neither mp3 or ogg is the best. MPC would be better. There's no need to tell me when I'm right; I operate on that principle exclusively and with absolute certainty |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Mostly Harmless
(Alumni) Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,319
|
Quote:
. If I'm ripping it myself I use ogg at q6, I have yet to hear any artifact, so I think q7 is overkill. Indeed q5 is probably sufficient. MPC is good if you're a real purist, but why not just store the CD safely, and use that .[edit]BTW: I have a $1000 listening setup and I have yet to find an artifact in q6 oggs during normal listening.[/edit] For long you live and high you fly, but only if you ride the tide, and balanced on the biggest wave you race towards an early grave. |Musicbrainz|Audioscrobbler|last.fm| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum King
|
How many times has this question been asked??? I stick with MP3's because they are widely available.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum King
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,432
|
Your options for archiving.
1) Just save the wave files, like me ![]() 2) Lossless codecs like Monkey's Audio, Flac, or Shorten. 3) MPC "-quality 7" if you have REAL great ears or your are paranoid about quality and want nothing but the best but don't want to have huge wave files lying around. 4) MPC "-quality 6" if you have real good ears and/or if you plan to transcode the files into other formats in the future (for whatever reason). 5) MPC "-quality 5" if you have real good ears and/or if you don't plan to transcode the files into other formats ever (for whatever reason). If you don't have EXTREMELY high standards for lossy codecs and maybe would like to be able to take these files you make with you on a portable audio player, then use AAC. Both OGG and AAC are roughly the same in quality, but I'd suggest AAC over OGG as it is becoming the the new world wide standard audio format. This is not an opinion. This this transition from MP3 to AAC is only picking up speed. Everything audio related will have built in AAC (MPEG-4 Audio) support within a year or two. Everything from cell phones to portable audio players to software devices. Although OGG has seen a few portable devices add support, the number will remain small, but AAC's support is growing rapidly. A new official release of the AAC standard will be comming out soon, so go ask and read about it on Hydrogenaudio.org. That is the place to go for everything audio codec related. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Mostly Harmless
(Alumni) Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,319
|
Quote:
For long you live and high you fly, but only if you ride the tide, and balanced on the biggest wave you race towards an early grave. |Musicbrainz|Audioscrobbler|last.fm| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Forum King
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Hawarden
Posts: 2,115
|
Quote:
http://foetusized.org/cdrot.html http://www.mv.com/ipusers/richbreton/m/files/cd_rot.htm Assuming a CD will last forever is a dangerous business... For the record, I rip all my CDs with Ogg -q5. I'm not archiving them, so lossless quality isn't an issue (although one day it will be). It's just a damn big playlist. Changing CDs is such a pain in the arse...
There's no need to tell me when I'm right; I operate on that principle exclusively and with absolute certainty |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Mostly Harmless
(Alumni) Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,319
|
I'd classify the risk of loss of my MP3s as higher than the risk of loss of my CDs
. Assuming that your hard drive/CD-R/exotic storage device will last forever is even more dangerous .
For long you live and high you fly, but only if you ride the tide, and balanced on the biggest wave you race towards an early grave. |Musicbrainz|Audioscrobbler|last.fm| |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Forum King
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,432
|
Quote:
This is the new standard. And a very good one. p.s. check out this article. Apple starts music service based on AAC. http://www.betanews.com/article.php3?sid=1046961372 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Mostly Harmless
(Alumni) Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,319
|
Quote:
Similarly it won't become a standard feature in Winamp because it isn't free. For long you live and high you fly, but only if you ride the tide, and balanced on the biggest wave you race towards an early grave. |Musicbrainz|Audioscrobbler|last.fm| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum King
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,432
|
for the last time... 3rd party plug-ins.
And Winamp (along with AOL) probably will eventually get AAC support as a standard feature once the demand becomes big enough. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Mostly Harmless
(Alumni) Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,319
|
And exactly why should I switch from the free to encode and decode vorbis to AAC which will cost me $20 per channel to encode (so, if I wanted to encode 5.1 audio in AAC, that'll be $120 for the encoder, thank you), and is of pretty much equivalent quality. Not going to happen, especially since Vorbis portables are slowly but steadily increasing in number.
For long you live and high you fly, but only if you ride the tide, and balanced on the biggest wave you race towards an early grave. |Musicbrainz|Audioscrobbler|last.fm| |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 | |
|
Forum King
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,432
|
Quote:
If they just plan on keeping the songs on their computer then it doesn't really matter what format they choose as long as they find the quality to be good enough. But as some point or another most people want to take their music with them. Also, if you personally know that the portable player you want supports OGG's, then go ahead and use OGG. But then, whatlater that year you see a new player that you'd really like to get, but it doesn't support OGG. Oh well, looks like your gonna have to transcode. I just personally feel it's better to leave your options open, but more importantly I feel we should leave the options open for people that we suggest things too. And again, using AAC wouldn't cost YOU a cent. There will be pleanty of free encoders and decoders out there, some that legally paid for a liscence and some that didn't. Last edited by SNYder; 14th March 2003 at 00:15. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
Rudolf the Red.
(Forum King) Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 9,315
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Le Poison dans la Bouteille [Moderator]
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lavabo, fond du couloir, 3� porte � droite
Posts: 6,296
|
If you really want a perfect copy, then a lossless codec (FLAC, Monkeysaudio, LPAC) is the way to go.
For a lossy codec, I would choose either MP3 encoded with Lame using alt-preset extreme or Ogg vorbis at q6. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|