IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
My tuned Vorbis: QKTune beta 1 :), Improved pre-echo at q 2, 3, 4, 5
QuantumKnot
post Feb 28 2004, 14:12
Post #51





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



I've uploaded the partial source code of QKTune beta 3.2 so people can see what I've done and hopefully improve on it. It includes only the files that need to be replaced which are psy.c, info.c, and psych_44.h.

http://steve8988.homestead.com/files/vorbis/qkt32.tar.gz
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Feb 28 2004, 17:56
Post #52


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3760
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



Thanks Steve. smile.gif

I've merged this with GT3b2 and you can d/l a version of oggdropXPd compiled from this merged code at: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jfe1205/OggVo...9GT3b2QKT32.zip. Please remember that this is experimental code only, at this time. The Vendor String is somewhat lengthy and includes the word 'EXPERIMENTAL'!! wink.gif


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Feb 29 2004, 01:16
Post #53





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



QUOTE (john33 @ Feb 29 2004, 02:56 AM)
Thanks Steve. smile.gif

I've merged this with GT3b2 and you can d/l a version of oggdropXPd compiled from this merged code at: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jfe1205/OggVo...9GT3b2QKT32.zip. Please remember that this is experimental code only, at this time. The Vendor String is somewhat lengthy and includes the word 'EXPERIMENTAL'!! wink.gif

Awesome. Less typing for moi. wink.gif But just a minor point. Time to update the about box too rolleyes.gif wink.gif

This post has been edited by QuantumKnot: Feb 29 2004, 01:19
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
indybrett
post Feb 29 2004, 02:22
Post #54





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1350
Joined: 4-March 02
From: Indianapolis, IN
Member No.: 1440



Just to make sure I understand. This version has:

Garfs GT3B2 tuning
QuantumKnot's HF tuning

It does not have:

QuantumKnot's low bitrate pre-echo tuning

Is that correct?


--------------------
flac>fb2k>kernel streaming>audiophile 2496>magni>dt990 pro
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Feb 29 2004, 02:27
Post #55





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



QUOTE (indybrett @ Feb 29 2004, 11:22 AM)
Just to make sure I understand. This version has:

Garfs GT3B2 tuning
QuantumKnot's HF tuning

It does not have:

QuantumKnot's low bitrate pre-echo tuning

Is that correct?

From my understanding, it has everything! pre-echo improvement from 2 to 10. HF tuning for all q's
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
indybrett
post Feb 29 2004, 02:42
Post #56





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1350
Joined: 4-March 02
From: Indianapolis, IN
Member No.: 1440



Awesome smile.gif


--------------------
flac>fb2k>kernel streaming>audiophile 2496>magni>dt990 pro
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
indybrett
post Feb 29 2004, 04:34
Post #57





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1350
Joined: 4-March 02
From: Indianapolis, IN
Member No.: 1440



QUOTE (john33 @ Feb 28 2004, 11:56 AM)
Please remember that this is experimental code only, at this time. The Vendor String is somewhat lengthy and includes the word 'EXPERIMENTAL'!! wink.gif

So what needs to happen next so that the experimental tag is no longer needed? More testing, or just more time to see if there are any bad reports from the field?

Just curious. I know it's still early in the process smile.gif


--------------------
flac>fb2k>kernel streaming>audiophile 2496>magni>dt990 pro
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Feb 29 2004, 05:51
Post #58





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



QUOTE (indybrett @ Feb 29 2004, 01:34 PM)
More testing, or just more time to see if there are any bad reports from the field?

I guess both. smile.gif I've already encoded a few albums using this encoder and haven't been struck with spurious tones (like in the first version of beta 3.2 rolleyes.gif ) so it should be safe in terms of detrimental breakage. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
harashin
post Feb 29 2004, 05:53
Post #59





Group: Members
Posts: 339
Joined: 20-February 02
From: Kyoto, Japan
Member No.: 1362



The oggdropXPdV1.7.9GT3b2QKT32 seems to produce different files from QuantumKnot's oggenchfr.exe. Does the difference of compiler settings cause this behaviour? And is this nothing worth worrying about?

gt3b2qk32.png

Thank you guys for your work anyway.


--------------------
Folding@Home Hydrogenaudio.org Team ID# 32639
http://folding.stanford.edu/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Feb 29 2004, 06:02
Post #60





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



QUOTE (harashin @ Feb 29 2004, 02:53 PM)
The oggdropXPdV1.7.9GT3b2QKT32 seems to produce different files from QuantumKnot's oggenchfr.exe. Does the difference of compiler settings cause this behaviour? And is this nothing worth worrying about?

gt3b2qk32.png

Thank you guys for your work anyway.

I'm not sure what compiler John used. I used VC.NET while he probably used VC6 with the Intel compiler. If that is the case, then it is not unusual for the files produced to be different. Or you could try ABXing the files. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
harashin
post Feb 29 2004, 06:05
Post #61





Group: Members
Posts: 339
Joined: 20-February 02
From: Kyoto, Japan
Member No.: 1362



QUOTE (QuantumKnot @ Feb 29 2004, 02:02 PM)
I'm not sure what compiler John used.  I used VC.NET while he probably used VC6 with the Intel compiler.  If that is the case, then it is not unusual for the files produced to be different.  Or you could try ABXing the files. smile.gif

Thanks for the clarification. smile.gif


--------------------
Folding@Home Hydrogenaudio.org Team ID# 32639
http://folding.stanford.edu/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Feb 29 2004, 06:21
Post #62





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



For those who are comparing q 3 and 4 with my oggencqk32.exe binary, the files will be different, mainly because I did some more pre-echo tuning before I uploaded the source code. I used castanets to get the perfect clack at q 4. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mmortal03
post Feb 29 2004, 10:05
Post #63





Group: Members
Posts: 601
Joined: 19-July 02
From: USA
Member No.: 2667



I just encoded my entire collection for testing with the experimental build of OggDropXPd, and interestingly enough, it became smaller by about 3 percent. I saved about 300 megabytes on a 10 GB collection encoded with gt3b2. Interesting that your tunings would have a positive gain of lower average bitrates as well as hypothetically better sound. smile.gif

This post has been edited by mmortal03: Feb 29 2004, 10:07


--------------------
WARNING: Changing of advanced parameters might degrade sound quality. Modify them only if you are expirienced in audio compression!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Feb 29 2004, 10:14
Post #64





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



QUOTE (mmortal03 @ Feb 29 2004, 07:05 PM)
I just encoded my entire collection for testing with the experimental build of OggDropXPd, and interestingly enough, it became smaller by about 3 percent.  I saved about 300 megabytes on a 10 GB collection encoded with gt3b2.  Interesting that your tunings would have a positive gain of lower average bitrates as well as hypothetically better sound. smile.gif

Yes, the HF reduction does produce smaller files since I'm applying a limiter to cut out the high frequency boost, hence there is some loss of information, and thus smaller size. Of course, we hope that we lose the undesirable information only which is why some more testing on everyday music is as much needed as listening tests based on small, special case samples. wink.gif

This post has been edited by QuantumKnot: Feb 29 2004, 10:16
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Feb 29 2004, 10:36
Post #65


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3760
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



QUOTE (QuantumKnot @ Feb 29 2004, 12:16 AM)
Awesome.  Less typing for moi. wink.gif But just a minor point.  Time to update the about box too rolleyes.gif  wink.gif

You're right. wink.gif I did change the heading in the 'About' box, but not the narrative about the tuning. Let's get some feedback and then, assuming all is well, we can release with a full narrative rewrite, where necessary.

Should I publish the merged libs? I guess, yes. Give me an hour, or two, and I'll upload.


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Feb 29 2004, 10:57
Post #66


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3760
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



Uploaded the 3 files as QuantumKnot did. 'psy.c' is unchanged from Steve's upload, 'info.c' and 'psych_44.h' have changed.

Files are here: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jfe1205/OggVo...gt3b2_qkt32.zip


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
maikmerten
post Feb 29 2004, 15:30
Post #67





Group: Members
Posts: 219
Joined: 12-February 02
Member No.: 1312



Hello,

I´ve merged Vorbis CVS and qkt32.tar.gz for a private linux-compile. I found a piece of "normal" music sounding strange. (However, vorbis 1.0.1 doesn´t seem better to me on this sample but I may have to check this again...)

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=188853

Maik
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
mmortal03
post Feb 29 2004, 19:59
Post #68





Group: Members
Posts: 601
Joined: 19-July 02
From: USA
Member No.: 2667



Well, this knocked (-) ions down from 375 to 364 kbps smile.gif. Now I'll have to see if I can ABX them. It doesn't seem like one would be able to ABX between that high of bitrates, but who knows.

What type of music should we be listening to to find problems here? Aphex Twin type stuff, some of which has the highest average bitrates, or for instance, The White Stripes album De Stijl, which has some of the lowest average bitrates in my collection, where losing bits might affect the sound more? In other words, should we be looking at the extremes here, or is there no particular pattern to look for?

This post has been edited by mmortal03: Feb 29 2004, 20:01


--------------------
WARNING: Changing of advanced parameters might degrade sound quality. Modify them only if you are expirienced in audio compression!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
phoolgobi
post Feb 29 2004, 22:23
Post #69





Group: Members
Posts: 92
Joined: 13-December 03
Member No.: 10415



Hi,
I was testing QK HF tuning of Vorbis, and may I say that it is without a doubt absolutely super work smile.gif Well done Quantum Knot !!!

Okay, so I tested low bitrate performance with a music track that has a classical Indian instrument called the 'Tabla' in the beginning. I also tested other codecs at 64 kbps CBR and ~64 kbps VBR. The codecs were AAC HE and LC (Nero), and mp3PRO (Nero). For the vorbis encodes I used oggdropXPd encoder at q = 0.

The bitrates of various encoded files are as follows:

Ogg Vorbis
==========
V 1.0.1 67
QKTune beta 3.2 63

AAC
==========
AAC HE (VBR) 61
AAC HE (CBR) 64
AAC LC (CBR) 64

mp3PRO
==========
VBR 51
CBR 64

It comes as no surprise that all the codecs are easily ABXable, but it is surprising that both the SBR based codecs (AAC HE and PRO) perform badly. The encodes sound the worst from the lot. The AAC LC encode sounds better than HE for the tabla part, but when electronic music starts it looses out heavily.

On the other hand Vorbis 1.0.1 suffers from high freq noise but does reproduce the tabla better than SBR based codecs. QK Tune 3.2 does so much better than 1.0.1 and produces smaller files as well.

The ranking based on my testing:

Vorbis QK3.2 > Vorbis1.0.1 > AAC LC > AAC HE > mp3PRO

I want to upload this sample file. How do I go about that? I would appreciate it if some of you could do a little testing on this file and confirm the same.


EDIT: Uploaded the file

EDIT: The bitrates indicated here are for the complete file not for the 30 sec sample

This post has been edited by phoolgobi: Mar 1 2004, 07:24
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
music_man_mpc
post Feb 29 2004, 23:43
Post #70





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 707
Joined: 20-July 03
From: Canada
Member No.: 7895



QUOTE (phoolgobi @ Feb 29 2004, 01:23 PM)
It comes as no surprise that all the codecs are easily ABXable, but it is surprising that both the SBR based codecs (AAC HE and PRO) perform badly. The encodes sound the worst from the lot. The AAC LC encode sounds better than HE for the tabla part, but when electronic music starts it looses out heavily.

You didn't decode with FAAD2, did you?


--------------------
gentoo ~amd64 + layman | ncmpcpp/mpd | wavpack + vorbis + lame
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Mar 1 2004, 01:08
Post #71





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



QUOTE (phoolgobi @ Mar 1 2004, 07:23 AM)
Hi,
I was testing QK HF tuning of Vorbis, and may I say that it is without a doubt absolutely super work smile.gif Well done Quantum Knot !!!

Okay, so I tested low bitrate performance with a music track that has a classical Indian instrument called the 'Tabla' in the beginning. I also tested other codecs at 64 kbps CBR and ~64 kbps VBR. The codecs were AAC HE and LC (Nero), and mp3PRO (Nero). For the vorbis encodes I used oggdropXPd encoder at q = 0.

The bitrates of various encoded files are as follows:

Ogg Vorbis
==========
V 1.0.1                  67
QKTune beta 3.2    63

AAC
==========
AAC HE (VBR)      61
AAC HE (CBR)      64
AAC LC (CBR)      64

mp3PRO
==========
VBR                      51
CBR                      64

It comes as no surprise that all the codecs are easily ABXable, but it is surprising that both the SBR based codecs (AAC HE and PRO) perform badly. The encodes sound the worst from the lot. The AAC LC encode sounds better than HE for the tabla part, but when electronic music starts it looses out heavily.

On the other hand Vorbis 1.0.1 suffers from high freq noise but does reproduce the tabla better than SBR based codecs. QK Tune 3.2 does so much better than 1.0.1 and produces smaller files as well.

The ranking based on my testing:

Vorbis QK3.2 > Vorbis1.0.1 > AAC LC > AAC HE > mp3PRO

I want to upload this sample file. How do I go about that? I would appreciate it if some of you could do a little testing on this file and confirm the same.

hmmm....It beat HE-AAC? That is most unusual since Vorbis is very mediocre at such low bitrate while SBR is absolute magic!! Definitely need some verification here. You can upload the sound file in the uploads section, in the thread called 'Vorbis samples'.

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=180700
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Mar 1 2004, 01:18
Post #72





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



HE-AAC (current encoder) isn't perfect. Some samples have problems with the Nero encoder, and sometimes, other solutions are better.
Maybe the sample could help Ivan, but in my opinion, this situation is not something exceptionnal.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tigre
post Mar 1 2004, 01:20
Post #73


Moderator


Group: Members
Posts: 1434
Joined: 26-November 02
Member No.: 3890



QUOTE (QuantumKnot @ Mar 1 2004, 02:08 AM)
hmmm....It beat HE-AAC?  That is most unusual since Vorbis is very mediocre at such low bitrate while SBR is absolute magic!!  Definitely need some verification here.  You can upload the sound file in the uploads section, in the thread called 'Vorbis samples'.

IMO it's no surprise that Vorbis can beat HE-AAC on a single sample. If you have a look at rjamorim's last 64kbps multiformat test, you'll see that there were some samples where (at least a big part of the) listeners prefered vorbis over HE-AAC or mp3pro.


--------------------
Let's suppose that rain washes out a picnic. Who is feeling negative? The rain? Or YOU? What's causing the negative feeling? The rain or your reaction? - Anthony De Mello
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Mar 1 2004, 01:39
Post #74





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



Oh ok, I don't have much experience with AAC I guess, but from the few times I've tried HE-AAC and mp3pro, they just blew me away.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Mar 1 2004, 02:25
Post #75





Group: Developer
Posts: 1245
Joined: 16-December 02
From: Australia
Member No.: 4097



QUOTE (mmortal03 @ Mar 1 2004, 04:59 AM)
What type of music should we be listening to to find problems here?  Aphex Twin type stuff, some of which has the highest average bitrates, or for instance, The White Stripes album De Stijl, which has some of the lowest average bitrates in my collection, where losing bits might affect the sound more?  In other words, should we be looking at the extremes here, or is there no particular pattern to look for?

Hard to say. I guess the first thing is to test music which 1.0.1 has a tendency to boost sounds like cymbals and hi-hats.

Second problem that might surface with this hack is stereo imaging problems. Try to listen for stereo flipping, stereo collapse, or anything unusual about the stereo. smile.gif

Pre-echo is not top priority since you can only get so much with q 4 and most people are annoyed by hiss/noise more than anything else. smile.gif

QUOTE (maikmerten @ Mar 1 2004, 12:30 AM)
Hello,

I´ve merged Vorbis CVS and qkt32.tar.gz for a private linux-compile. I found a piece of "normal" music sounding strange. (However, vorbis 1.0.1 doesn´t seem better to me on this sample but I may have to check this again...)

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=188853

Maik


Oh I should have posted my linux binary too. I do all my Vorbis development in Linux. smile.gif

This post has been edited by QuantumKnot: Mar 1 2004, 03:11
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

5 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd October 2014 - 19:40