IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
aoTuVb2 Encoder, Archiving audio with aoTuVb2 encoder
yong
post Jul 11 2004, 11:56
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 202
Joined: 9-July 04
From: Malaysia
Member No.: 15210



I know currently the aoTuVb2 encoder is the best one, but the aoTuV"b2" mean it is beta 2 isn't it? Should i use the beta encoder to archive audio?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jul 11 2004, 12:03
Post #2





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



WMA, Blade, Plugger, VQF are not beta, but it's not a reason to use it. On the other side, most MPC encoders are beta, and quality is fine.

aoTuV was tested by some members of the community. It's a great improvement, compared to "stable and final" 1.01. It's safe to use it, though it's in beta stage. For archiving, I nevertheless suggest to take a look on the "megamix" version, merging aoTuV code with GT3b2 and QK32, and allowing in consequence better transients (less pre-echo, more sharpness).

You could also take a look on CVS encoder 1.1. It's in Release Candidate (RC) stage, one step behind on safety compared to simple "beta" wink.gif This 1.1RC1 merged aoTuV tunings in official branch.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
QuantumKnot
post Jul 12 2004, 00:47
Post #3





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



Such is the rapid state of Vorbis development now, with 1.1 RC1 out just a week or two after Megamix, I wonder if I should do a Megamix 2 based on this new 1.1 RC1 or should I wait for the final 1.1 version to be released? The only benefit I see is to have bitrate management working properly, as well as some bugfixes. But the big disadvantage I see with this is that I will be effectively adding another version of Vorbis on top of the many we already have, that will cause a lot of confusion. mellow.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
NeoMoose
post Jul 12 2004, 00:50
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 3-May 04
Member No.: 13854



Wait. Probably won't be much longer until 1.1 final.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
HotshotGG
post Jul 12 2004, 02:25
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 1593
Joined: 24-March 02
From: Revere, MA
Member No.: 1607



QUOTE (QuantumKnot @ Jul 11 2004, 07:47 PM)
Such is the rapid state of Vorbis development now, with 1.1 RC1 out just a week or two after Megamix, I wonder if I should do a Megamix 2 based on this new 1.1 RC1 or should I wait for the final 1.1 version to be released?  The only benefit I see is to have bitrate management working properly, as well as some bugfixes.  But the big disadvantage I see with this is that I will be effectively adding another version of Vorbis on top of the many we already have, that will cause a lot of confusion. mellow.gif
*


As if it hasn't already hehe. Nothing is ever perefect though you try and that's what count's ;-). Should be a full time job tweaking Vorbis encoder on problematic samples.


--------------------
College student/IT Assistant
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
yourtallness
post Jul 12 2004, 03:19
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 488
Joined: 8-October 02
From: Vrilissia, Athens
Member No.: 3503



The term "archiving" usually suggests lossless or
high bitrate encodes, and AFAIC aoTuVb2 shines
at the lower bitrates. Shouldn't you be sticking to
to GT3b2 (if vorbis is your choice for archiving) at
least until newer encoder versions e.g. 1.1 are
thoroughly tested?


--------------------
Wanna buy a monkey?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
analogy
post Jul 12 2004, 07:16
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 306
Joined: 18-April 04
Member No.: 13571



GT3b2 is also Beta. biggrin.gif

For archival, I'd rather do lossless, but if you want officially stable Vorbis, go with Xiph's 1.0.1.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Celsus
post Jul 12 2004, 07:46
Post #8





Group: Banned
Posts: 27
Joined: 8-July 04
Member No.: 15155



Well, will 1.1 be same quality as aoTuVb2? I mean - ALL tunings added? Anything else (tunings!) added?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
yong
post Jul 13 2004, 11:57
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 202
Joined: 9-July 04
From: Malaysia
Member No.: 15210



Ok, i will wait until 1.1 final. tongue.gif
Another question, is somebody know the ogg vorbis(aoTuVb2 or 1.0.1 version) each bandwidth for each bitrate?(Sorry, my english is very bad crying.gif )
(example: 128kbps, the bandwidth is xxxxxHz and so on), or where can i get those information?
Thanks for everybody who join in this topic.

This post has been edited by yong: Jul 13 2004, 12:00


--------------------
http://foobar2000.xrea.jp/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jul 13 2004, 12:04
Post #10





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



Vorbis encoder keeps by defaut the original bitrate from -q -1 (45 kbps) to -q 10 (500 kbps). In other words, CD ripping will stay at 44100 Hz, whatever the setting.


EDIT: wrong comprehension of the question.

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Jul 13 2004, 12:42
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sciller
post Jul 13 2004, 12:32
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 13-July 04
Member No.: 15401



QUOTE (yong @ Jul 13 2004, 11:57 AM)
Another question, is somebody know the ogg vorbis(aoTuVb2 or 1.0.1 version) each bandwidth for each bitrate?
*

for aotuvb2:
q-2 13,90012 khz
q-1 15,1 khz
q0 15,10007 khz
q1 15,80007 khz
q2 16,50007 khz
q3 17,20017 khz
q4 18,90012 khz
q5 20,10279 khz
q6 48,095327 khz
q7-10 999,0 khz
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Jul 13 2004, 12:59
Post #12


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


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



QUOTE (analogy @ Jul 12 2004, 06:16 AM)
GT3b2 is also Beta. biggrin.gif

For archival, I'd rather do lossless, but if you want officially stable Vorbis, go with Xiph's 1.0.1.
*

FYI, Monty has always stated that the latest committed source code is the most stable; that would be 1.1RC1. wink.gif


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
yong
post Jul 14 2004, 11:53
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 202
Joined: 9-July 04
From: Malaysia
Member No.: 15210



Sorry for guruboolez, cause i let him misunderstand... sad.gif
And thanks for sciller answer my question!


--------------------
http://foobar2000.xrea.jp/
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: 22nd August 2014 - 02:20