IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

7 Pages V  « < 4 5 6 7 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
aoTuV pre-beta 5 released!, a new aoTuv-beta for low bitrates
Aoyumi
post Aug 17 2006, 14:52
Post #126





Group: Members
Posts: 236
Joined: 14-January 04
From: Kanto, Japan
Member No.: 11215



QUOTE (pepoluan @ Aug 17 2006, 03:38) *
Aoyumi, I read a rather new posting somewhere, people are shying from your tunings because they see it as "beta" so in their mind it's "unstable/test version" or something. The poster recommended you drop the "beta" word.

I just report it to you; if others can show the posting I'd be glad. I can't seem to find it again...

Before, I considered stopping the beta notation. However, since this kind of software always needs to be tested, I am continuing the beta notation in the symbolic meaning. wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
token
post Aug 20 2006, 01:25
Post #127





Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 28-November 05
From: chicago, il
Member No.: 26074



*most* "open source" software keeps the 'beta' title forever. Wine has been out for over 10 years, and they *just* adopted the beta title. MPlayer is still 'prerelease', even though they are in their 8th prerelease and are always adding new features. I believe a different methodology needs to be adopted as a whole for all open source software, but that's not aoyumi's responsibility. I'd look at AoTuV as release 4.51, not beta 4.51.. It's confusing to some people, but for something like aoyumi's tunings, being done as a hobby, I'd never feel comfortable giving it a 'version' number mysql (edit: why did I put mysql? I meant MYSELF). Although I do think you should adopt a 'release' number instead. You could call the next release 'release 5' instead of 'beta 5', it wont shy people away, the number stays, and you can wiggle around calling it 'stable'.. Releasing it under 'version' scheme would say 'its stable' to most people, but I think calling it a 'release' would leave room for people to make up their own minds about how stable it is, which is an ideal middle ground for what you're doing.

My 2 cents smile.gif

This post has been edited by token: Aug 20 2006, 01:29


--------------------
q4 AoTuV Vorbis is my friend.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
HbG
post Aug 20 2006, 11:26
Post #128





Group: Members
Posts: 289
Joined: 12-May 03
From: The Hague
Member No.: 6555



I get the impression that most who are not familiar with the open source community shy away from beta as something other people test and they start using when beta becomes release or final. Perhaps a useful middle way are other terms like "release candidate" as that suggests there are no bugs in it in the sense of broken features and it just needs testing. In the strict sense of the word everything that is publically available is "released".

I don't like the -stable title as that suggests it's otherwise unstable, probably shying more people away from it...

I'm not a programmer, let alone one of aoyumi's caliber, but i would assume those who really test aotuv and give meaningful feedback will do so regardless of the presence beta tag.

Another idea would be to include the beta status only as a b in the version number, ie: "aotuv release b4.51"


--------------------
Veni Vidi Vorbis.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
smok3
post Aug 20 2006, 12:36
Post #129


A/V Moderator


Group: Moderator
Posts: 1728
Joined: 30-April 02
From: Slovenia
Member No.: 1922



or you can just manipulate your mind a bit and use those voices in your head to call it: 'stable enough for me, there was no beta included release' or something.... tongue.gif


--------------------
PANIC: CPU 1: Cache Error (unrecoverable - dcache data) Eframe = 0x90000000208cf3b8
NOTICE - cpu 0 didn't dump TLB, may be hung
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pepoluan
post Aug 21 2006, 14:58
Post #130





Group: Members
Posts: 1455
Joined: 22-November 05
From: Jakarta
Member No.: 25929



The Linux versioning system is quite good actually.


--------------------
Nobody is Perfect.
I am Nobody.

http://pandu.poluan.info
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Aoyumi
post Aug 23 2006, 15:43
Post #131





Group: Members
Posts: 236
Joined: 14-January 04
From: Kanto, Japan
Member No.: 11215



I considered the version and performed it as follows. smile.gif

aoTuV page
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
MuncherOfSpleens
post Aug 23 2006, 15:47
Post #132





Group: Members
Posts: 109
Joined: 25-October 05
From: Florida
Member No.: 25360



QUOTE (Aoyumi @ Aug 23 2006, 10:43) *
I considered the version and performed it as follows. smile.gif

aoTuV page

I see you decided to get rid of the "beta" thing! I'll try it out right away!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pepoluan
post Aug 23 2006, 15:47
Post #133





Group: Members
Posts: 1455
Joined: 22-November 05
From: Jakarta
Member No.: 25929



w00t.gif w00t! Release version!

*dances with joy*


--------------------
Nobody is Perfect.
I am Nobody.

http://pandu.poluan.info
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Aug 23 2006, 16:02
Post #134


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


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



QUOTE (Aoyumi @ Aug 23 2006, 15:43) *
I considered the version and performed it as follows. smile.gif

aoTuV page

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only thing that's changed here is the designation isn't it? ie., the vendor string in info.c. There are no other code changes that I can see, are there?


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Aoyumi
post Aug 23 2006, 16:15
Post #135





Group: Members
Posts: 236
Joined: 14-January 04
From: Kanto, Japan
Member No.: 11215



A new version is due to become a "beta" again. If it is fully tested by people and it is satisfactory, it will become a next release version. smile.gif

QUOTE (john33 @ Aug 24 2006, 00:02) *
QUOTE (Aoyumi @ Aug 23 2006, 15:43) *

I considered the version and performed it as follows. smile.gif

aoTuV page

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only thing that's changed here is the designation isn't it? ie., the vendor string in info.c. There are no other code changes that I can see, are there?

A difference is not in output. rolleyes.gif
(based on libvorbis 1.1.2 )

This post has been edited by Aoyumi: Aug 23 2006, 16:23
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jarsonic
post Aug 23 2006, 19:08
Post #136





Group: Members
Posts: 199
Joined: 30-September 01
From: C-ville, VA
Member No.: 83



I think that more people that might have been "on the fence" with using AoTuV when it was in beta will be much more likely to use this "release" version (even if the internal workings between beta 4.51 and the release are almost negligible).

Good job, and keep up the wonderful work, Aoyumi. smile.gif

This post has been edited by jarsonic: Aug 23 2006, 19:08
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pepoluan
post Aug 23 2006, 19:49
Post #137





Group: Members
Posts: 1455
Joined: 22-November 05
From: Jakarta
Member No.: 25929



I'll wait for John33's OggDropXPd and oggenc before I update the wiki page smile.gif


--------------------
Nobody is Perfect.
I am Nobody.

http://pandu.poluan.info
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Aug 23 2006, 21:01
Post #138


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


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



QUOTE (pepoluan @ Aug 23 2006, 19:49) *
I'll wait for John33's OggDropXPd and oggenc before I update the wiki page smile.gif

Your wait is over!! cool.gif New compiles available now. smile.gif


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
fpi
post Aug 24 2006, 12:27
Post #139





Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 24-October 05
Member No.: 25326



QUOTE (Aoyumi @ Aug 23 2006, 08:43) *
I considered the version and performed it as follows. smile.gif

aoTuV page


Some minor suggestions:
1) in the file aoTuV_technical.txt there is the changelog for aoTuV beta4.5, for aoTuV beta4a (this should be the same release of beta4.5) and this last one has the same changelog of the next version, that should be beta4 (apart from "and noise compander parameters"). - I think that the paragraph of beta4a should be removed.
2) in the file aoTuV_technical.txt in the aoTuV beta4.5 paragraph, before 2. and 3. there are two strange characters (should be replaced with spaces);
3) the filename should be libvorbis-aotuv_r1.tar.gz , without the extra tgz .
4) some file (configure , autogen.sh , ...) are missing the executable "x" flag on unix.
5) would be nice to provide a patch against libvorbis-1.1.2 (useful for unix users and distributions, I can provide that if you want).

Anyway, thanks for the release smile.gif

This post has been edited by fpi: Aug 24 2006, 12:44
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
hugo25
post Aug 24 2006, 12:33
Post #140





Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 15-April 06
Member No.: 29583



QUOTE (Aoyumi @ Aug 23 2006, 16:43) *
I considered the version and performed it as follows. smile.gif

aoTuV page

I don't understand where is the encoder. blush.gif

This post has been edited by hugo25: Aug 24 2006, 13:42
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Aug 24 2006, 12:42
Post #141


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


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



QUOTE (hugo25 @ Aug 24 2006, 12:33) *
QUOTE (Aoyumi @ Aug 23 2006, 16:43) *

I considered the version and performed it as follows. smile.gif

aoTuV page

I don't understand xhere is the encoder. blush.gif

Rarewares!! wink.gif


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
haregoo
post Aug 24 2006, 12:46
Post #142





Group: Members
Posts: 192
Joined: 16-January 06
Member No.: 27155



QUOTE (john33 @ Aug 24 2006, 20:42) *
QUOTE (hugo25 @ Aug 24 2006, 12:33) *

QUOTE (Aoyumi @ Aug 23 2006, 16:43) *

I considered the version and performed it as follows. smile.gif

aoTuV page

I don't understand xhere is the encoder. blush.gif

Rarewares!! wink.gif

And Lancer.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
hugo25
post Aug 24 2006, 13:42
Post #143





Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 15-April 06
Member No.: 29583



but there are not Win32 reference binary ?

This post has been edited by hugo25: Aug 24 2006, 13:42
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
fpi
post Aug 24 2006, 13:45
Post #144





Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 24-October 05
Member No.: 25326



r1 has a high compression ratio: all files are 1 byte smaller than beta 4.51 smile.gif: the string of r1 is on byte smaller:
CODE
AO; aoTuV r1 [20051117] (based on Xiph.Org's libVorbis)
AO; aoTuV b4b [20051117] (based on Xiph.Org's libVorbis)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Aoyumi
post Aug 24 2006, 15:33
Post #145





Group: Members
Posts: 236
Joined: 14-January 04
From: Kanto, Japan
Member No.: 11215



QUOTE (fpi @ Aug 24 2006, 20:27) *
Some minor suggestions:
1) in the file aoTuV_technical.txt there is the changelog for aoTuV beta4.5, for aoTuV beta4a (this should be the same release of beta4.5) and this last one has the same changelog of the next version, that should be beta4 (apart from "and noise compander parameters"). - I think that the paragraph of beta4a should be removed.
2) in the file aoTuV_technical.txt in the aoTuV beta4.5 paragraph, before 2. and 3. there are two strange characters (should be replaced with spaces);
3) the filename should be libvorbis-aotuv_r1.tar.gz , without the extra tgz .
4) some file (configure , autogen.sh , ...) are missing the executable "x" flag on unix.
5) would be nice to provide a patch against libvorbis-1.1.2 (useful for unix users and distributions, I can provide that if you want).

A1. A2.
I checked the above-mentioned problem. I will correct it. Thank you.

A4.
Those files are the same as libvorbis 1.1.2. And I do not understand them...

A5.
I will prepare patch, after correcting the above-mentioned problem.
smile.gif


<<I updated the aoTuV page according to the above. >>

This post has been edited by Aoyumi: Aug 25 2006, 15:41
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ckjnigel
post Aug 24 2006, 18:24
Post #146





Group: Members
Posts: 218
Joined: 12-October 01
Member No.: 278



The Lancer/Blacksword notes don't suggest that a 2006 version of aoTuV is built into their August 24, 2006 build.
John33's P4 build in Rarewares ran mighty fast and well on this x64 AMD 3300+.
I converted Pimsleur Japanese learning audio CDs for playback on my Cowon JetAudio. Though I'm trying to learn Japanese without romaji, jumpimg immediately to kana and kanji, I do want to say to Aoyumisan:
Domo arigato gozaimasu! biggrin.gif

This post has been edited by ckjnigel: Aug 24 2006, 18:27
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
haregoo
post Aug 24 2006, 19:00
Post #147





Group: Members
Posts: 192
Joined: 16-January 06
Member No.: 27155



QUOTE (ckjnigel @ Aug 25 2006, 02:24) *
The Lancer/Blacksword notes don't suggest that a 2006 version of aoTuV is built into their August 24, 2006 build.


Every single .ogg has the vendor tag that reveal the encoder.

CODE
tool = BS; Lancer(SSE2) [20060824] (based on aoTuV r1 [20051117])


And you can find detailed change log on this page.

This post has been edited by haregoo: Aug 24 2006, 19:01
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ckjnigel
post Aug 24 2006, 19:31
Post #148





Group: Members
Posts: 218
Joined: 12-October 01
Member No.: 278



^
haregoo:
I don't understand the references to both 20060824 and 20051117.
Is the fact that November 2005 is still cited because the newest codec tweaks only affect encoding at quality ratings under 1.0?

This post has been edited by ckjnigel: Aug 24 2006, 19:32
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
haregoo
post Aug 24 2006, 19:46
Post #149





Group: Members
Posts: 192
Joined: 16-January 06
Member No.: 27155



QUOTE (ckjnigel @ Aug 25 2006, 03:31) *
I don't understand the references to both 20060824 and 20051117.
Is the fact that November 2005 is still cited because the newest codec tweaks only affect encoding at quality ratings under 1.0?

aoTuV Release 1 is equal to aoTuV b4.51(20051117) quality-wise, and Lancer 20060824 is based on aoTuV Release 1(r1). In terms of quality, there are NO difference in these encoders.

Did I make myself clear?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
fpi
post Aug 25 2006, 08:17
Post #150





Group: Members
Posts: 58
Joined: 24-October 05
Member No.: 25326



QUOTE (haregoo @ Aug 24 2006, 12:46) *
aoTuV Release 1 is equal to aoTuV b4.51(20051117) quality-wise, and Lancer 20060824 is based on aoTuV Release 1(r1). In terms of quality, there are NO difference in these encoders.

Did I make myself clear?


Just to make sure to all that there are no difference in code between beta 4.51 and Release 1: this is the difference between libvorbis-1.1.2 patched with beta 4.51 and Release 1:
CODE
diff -purN libvorbis-1.1.2/COPYING aotuv-r1_20051117/COPYING
--- libvorbis-1.1.2/COPYING     2006-08-24 14:47:35.000000000 +0200
+++ aotuv-r1_20051117/COPYING   2006-08-23 14:56:14.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-aoTuV - Copyright (c) 2003-2005 Aoyumi
+aoTuV - Copyright (c) 2003-2006 Aoyumi
libvorbis - Copyright (c) 2002-2005 Xiph.org Foundation

Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
diff -purN libvorbis-1.1.2/aoTuV_README-1st.txt aotuv-r1_20051117/aoTuV_README-1st.txt
--- libvorbis-1.1.2/aoTuV_README-1st.txt        2006-08-24 14:47:35.000000000 +0200
+++ aotuv-r1_20051117/aoTuV_README-1st.txt      2006-08-23 15:02:14.000000000 +0200
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-aoTuV beta4.51 release note
+aoTuV Release 1

"aoTuV" tunes up Xiph.Org's libvorbis uniquely.
A license is taken as "BSD-style license" as well as original libvorbis.
@@ -9,16 +9,15 @@ A license is taken as "BSD-style license
   Manuke's patch is used for improvement in the speed of sort processing.
   When "#define OPT_SORT" of "lib/psy.h" is deleted, the conventional
   processing method is used.
+  Thanks! Manuke.

-
-Thanks! Manuke.
-
+  This version is the same contents as aoTuV beta4.51.


aoTuV based on <Xiph.Org libvorbis>

Copyright (c) 2002-2005 Xiph.Org Foundation
-Copyright (c) 2003-2005 Aoyumi
+Copyright (c) 2003-2006 Aoyumi


-AUTHOR : aoyumi <aoyumi at inter7.jp>
\ No newline at end of file
+AUTHOR : aoyumi <aoyumi at gmail.com>
diff -purN libvorbis-1.1.2/lib/info.c aotuv-r1_20051117/lib/info.c
--- libvorbis-1.1.2/lib/info.c  2006-08-24 14:47:35.000000000 +0200
+++ aotuv-r1_20051117/lib/info.c        2006-08-23 12:40:08.000000000 +0200
@@ -416,7 +416,7 @@ static int _vorbis_pack_info(oggpack_buf
}

static int _vorbis_pack_comment(oggpack_buffer *opb,vorbis_comment *vc){
-  char temp[]="AO; aoTuV b4b [20051117] (based on Xiph.Org's libVorbis)";
+  char temp[]="AO; aoTuV r1 [20051117] (based on Xiph.Org's libVorbis)";
   int bytes = strlen(temp);

   /* preamble */
diff -purN libvorbis-1.1.2/lib/psy.c aotuv-r1_20051117/lib/psy.c
--- libvorbis-1.1.2/lib/psy.c   2006-08-24 14:47:35.000000000 +0200
+++ aotuv-r1_20051117/lib/psy.c 2006-08-23 14:25:56.000000000 +0200
@@ -1066,7 +1066,6 @@ void _vp_offset_and_mix(vorbis_look_psy
     if(m4_val > 0){
        if(fmask && (m4_start<i)){
                mdct[i] *= m4_val;
-               //logmdct[i]=todB(mdct+i)  + .345; // + .345 is a hack
        }
     }
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

7 Pages V  « < 4 5 6 7 >
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: 29th August 2014 - 09:52