IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
various oggenc
phoolgobi
post Apr 27 2004, 21:14
Post #1





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



With so many versions of oggenc floating around, i thought of putting together a list of some of them.

encoder: aoTuV beta 2
vendor : AO; aoTuV b2 [20040420] (based on Xiph.Org's 1.0.1)
remarks: tuning done by aoyumi for all bitrates
aoyumi's encoders

encoder: aoTuV pre beta 2
vendor : AO; aoTuV b2 test [20040402] (based on Xiph.Org's 1.0.1)
remarks: tuning done by aoyumi for all bitrates
aoyumi's encoders

encoder: aoTuV pre beta 2 + QK 3.2
vendor : AO; aoTuV b2 test [20040402]+QKTune beta 3.2 (based on Xiph.Org's 1.0.1)
remarks: merge of tuning by aoyumi and Quantum Knot (w/o HFR)
Quantum Knot's encoders

encoder: GT3b1
vendor : Xiph.Org/Sjeng.Org libVorbis I 20020717 (GTune 3, beta 1)
remarks: tunings by Garf for high bitrates (q >= 5), based on vorbis 1.0
Garf's encoder

encoder: GT3b2
vendor : Xiph.Org/Sjeng.Org libVorbis I 20031230 (GTune 3 beta 2)
remarks: tunings by Garf for high bitrates (q >= 5), based on vorbis 1.0.1
GT3b2 Encoder

encoder: GT3b2 + HFR
vendor : Xiph.Org/Sjeng.Org libVorbis I 20031230 (GTune 3 beta 2 with HF Reduction)
remarks: Garf's tuning merged with Quantum Knot's HFR
Quantum Knot's encoders

encoder: QKTune beta 3.2
vendor : Xiph.Org libVorbis I 20031230 (QKTune beta 3.2) EXPERIMENTAL
remarks: tuning for pre echo and high freq reduction by Quantum Knot
Quantum Knot's encoders

As of now it is recomended to use GT3b2 for encoding with q >= 5
For q <= 4 it is recomended to use aoTuV beta 2

Let me know if i missed some encoder or information is incorrect / inaccurate.

[edit: links added]

This post has been edited by phoolgobi: Apr 27 2004, 22:44
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rjamorim
post Apr 27 2004, 21:35
Post #2


Rarewares admin


Group: Members
Posts: 7515
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Brazil
Member No.: 81



I recommend you add links.


--------------------
Get up-to-date binaries of Lame, AAC, Vorbis and much more at RareWares:
http://www.rarewares.org
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
phoolgobi
post Apr 27 2004, 22:45
Post #3





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



QUOTE (rjamorim @ Apr 27 2004, 12:35 PM)
I recommend you add links.

done wink.gif

This post has been edited by phoolgobi: Apr 27 2004, 22:46
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
rjamorim
post Apr 27 2004, 23:13
Post #4


Rarewares admin


Group: Members
Posts: 7515
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Brazil
Member No.: 81



Nice.

You are missing Nyaochi's Modest Tuning:
http://nyaochi.cocolog-nifty.com/audio/200...c_modest_t.html


--------------------
Get up-to-date binaries of Lame, AAC, Vorbis and much more at RareWares:
http://www.rarewares.org
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
phong
post May 13 2004, 19:02
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 346
Joined: 7-July 03
From: 15 & Ryan
Member No.: 7619



This thread should be stickied.


--------------------
I am *expanding!* It is so much *squishy* to *smell* you! *Campers* are the best! I have *anticipation* and then what? Better parties in *the middle* for sure.
http://www.phong.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dev0
post May 13 2004, 21:29
Post #6





Group: Developer
Posts: 1679
Joined: 23-December 01
From: Germany
Member No.: 731



Not sure about that, since some of these are just ment for testing and not recommendable for general usage yet.
I'd rather add more information to the Recommended Encoder Versions and Settings thread once some of the forks have 'stabelized' and are ready for general purpose usage.

rjamorim's test will hopefully produce some meaningful results.


--------------------
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest_OggZealot_*
post May 13 2004, 22:24
Post #7





Guests






I agree with devO I don't think all these experimental encoders should be sticky ... I think actually making listening tests in order to know if AOb2 is superior GT3b2 at all bitrate & in order to see if AOb2 should be the new overall HA recommended encoder would be much more clever than blindly adding every fork that exists ...

... not everyone even agree with GT3b2 being worth the bitrate jump so if all this forks get added that will become an even bigger mess ...

my personnal feeling is that V1.01 should be the recommended oggenc for newbies & AOb2 the recommended fork for advanced users (... with advanced earing)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mr.Radar
post May 16 2004, 21:31
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 4-June 03
Member No.: 6995



The GT3b1 encoder also has Garf's "Floggy" tuning. To enable it use files with 8KHz or 6KHz sample rates at q's -1 through -2 (yes, the Floggy tuning has a -2 q). I've found that below q -1, mono files have very loud screeching artifacts while stereo files have no problems.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 28th November 2014 - 17:22