ogg vs mp3

[PeterTheMaster]

i read a lot about ogg vorbis now.
does mp3 become obsolete?
or what are adventages of ogg over mp3?

[DJ Bobo]

ogg is better, you gotta encode it for your self, I got nice quality already with 96kbps.

But ogg (the word) sounds ugly, I don't feel happy using it, I'm sticking for the moment to AVI & MP3. But it's only a feeling, may be in the near future I'll switch to ogg.

But technically, ogg is better :)

[Sven Bent]

Originally posted by PeterTheMaster
i read a lot about ogg vorbis now.
does mp3 become obsolete?
or what are adventages of ogg over mp3?


mp3 has ben obsolete for audio encoding freaks for years :-)
its like the vinyl of audio coding

jsut bad qualtiy put it takes time for everybdoy else to move on to something new and better.

[DJ Bobo]

@ Sven
Come on man, mp3 is not bad at all, and ogg is not thaaat revolutionery, it brings about 25% smaller size as mp3 for the same quality, it's not thaaat much, it's almost insignificant when you ask me, considering that 32kbps more or less won't change the video quality!
When a codec gives you with 64kbps the same quality as mp3 @ 192kbps, then and only then I'll send mp3 to hell!

[PeterTheMaster]

if ogg is really 25% better, how come so many people still use mp3 and lame is still under development?
this is not an argument, i really like to know the answers.
does ogg have any disadvantages?

[DJ Bobo]

'cause ogg is still beta, the directshow filters are beta, the mux tools are not simple to use or are beta.
Any computer will play mp3 content directly, for ogg streams you need a specific direct show filter.
Editing AVI with mp3 sound is much simpler than ogg files (is it even possible to edit ogg files?!)

For me, MP3 is the way to go for now!

[PeterTheMaster]

well, that convinces me.

what is so different about ogg?
cant it be considered as something like mp3 only with more efficient algorithms? or does it represent a completely different approach?

[DJ Bobo]

it represents a completely different approach with more efficient algorithm :D

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by bobotns
'cause ogg is still beta, the directshow filters are beta, the mux tools are not simple to use or are beta.
Any computer will play mp3 content directly, for ogg streams you need a specific direct show filter.
Editing AVI with mp3 sound is much simpler than ogg files (is it even possible to edit ogg files?!)

For me, MP3 is the way to go for now!

Very wrong! Vorbis has not been beta for well over a year now! The Directshow filters while still being relatively new are quite complete. The MediaXW filters play and compress Vorbis just fine. The reason they are still Beta is because they were intended to be used to put and play Vorbis in AVI. To that end it has not worked right so it is still beta. Tobais's filters while even newer do just as good a job and add some unique features not found in any other players yet. Most Computers will play a vorbis stream with ease. If you have a current linux system most window managers handle it natively and there are no end to players just like under windows. Mac systems are a bit behind, but they play em as well. Vorbis is easier to use and encode to. The tagging system blows MP3 out of the water. The only problem at the moment is there is no software to directly edit OGG continers with audio and video. But you can easily edit OGG containers with only vorbis audio. In fact they edit easier than MP3 and the result is often much better!

The reason you still do not see everyone using it is because it is still relatively new and people are often reluctant to change their ways. Even if it benifits them. It took MPEG audio almost a decade to reach the height of use it enjoys today. Which just goes to show how outdated the format is! Even MP3-PRO is behind.

[Sven Bent]

Originally posted by bobotns
@ Sven
Come on man, mp3 is not bad at all, and ogg is not thaaat revolutionery, it brings about 25% smaller size as mp3 for the same quality, it's not thaaat much, it's almost insignificant when you ask me, considering that 32kbps more or less won't change the video quality!
When a codec gives you with 64kbps the same quality as mp3 @ 192kbps, then and only then I'll send mp3 to hell!

this is just about what the "slow tecnolgy adapeting people" are thinking.

but tekcnology does seldom do revolution but rather improve in small step.

an i was also thinking on .AAC (next next generation of layer3) and .mpc (really good hifi codec beat the hell out of mp3 at high bitrates)

if ogg is really 25% better, how come so many people still use mp3 and lame is still under development?

Look at what the other guy said

mainly people are slow to adopt new tecnology because they don't actually know what they are dealing with.

my mainly philsophy about mp3 is that i only used it if i'm forced to e.g. combatibility reasong with people rellying on OLD tecnology (mp3)


an when aac is posibel into .OGM i would go this way
AAC is even better then AC3


you must also remmeber that layer3 has some combatibiliteis issues regardings layer 1 and 3 which handicaps layer3

actualla here I'm goign over my head.. you should REALLY read the stuff over at www.hydrogenaudio.org

there are many audio coding developers and freaks with much more knowledge then I. And i bet if you read there for i week you will simpel know tha mp3's only advantages is portability.

personally i dont give a damn about portability. if peopels are slow to adobt new tecnology. its there fault they can enjoy what i have created :-)

and ofcause sharing coppyrigth stuff woulde be illegal anyway
:rolleyes:

many people are still using audicatalyst which has VERY bad quality encoding (baswd on Xing) but people are still usign it beacuse they knwo how i dont want to lear a better program.
Thats also why when peopels tell my they godd this and this stuff of the net. ass son as tey say mp3 i walk away.. just to baad quality


This godt a little long
But if you must have the whole truth.. ogg also have some probelms. these are mostly regarding pre-echo artifacts. (very seldom in moveis. but happens alot in aggrasive music)
Ogg REALLY fail on spahm.wav however most other test sampels show that ogg beats mp3

AAC stil better though :-)

[PeterTheMaster]

well, ok, sounds like i should give it a shot.