IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules

- No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!
- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.
- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.
- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

 
Closed TopicStart new topic
[TOS#8] Why does vorbis sound softer than mp3 ?, vorbis dynamic issue ?
goldenear
post Apr 30 2006, 10:41
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 78
Joined: 11-March 04
Member No.: 12648



Hi,

I was recently comparing ogg vorbis ( encoded with oggenc28 aoTuV beta 4.51, -q7 ) and mp3 ( encoded with Lame 3.97b, --preset extreme ). Even if I can't easily ABX the enconded files from the original wav files, it's very easy to ABX a mp3 file from an ogg file. i.e. with a very dynamic funky music (Sporto Kantes - Lee) I can always find wich sample is mp3 and wich one is vorbis... because mp3 sounds more "dynamic". Is there any technical reason for this? huh.gif
I have expiremented the same thing on my ipaq playing ogg and mp3 files with TCPMP on a high grade hifi stereo... The ogg files sound softer than the mp3 ones.
Could it be a decoder/player issue?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
user
post Apr 30 2006, 11:03
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 873
Joined: 12-October 01
From: the great wide open
Member No.: 277



I recommend you to post your ABX logs, and you provide samples/music, you abxed. :-)

If i assume, you don't expereinced placebo effects (you said, you abxed, letīs believe that), the technical reason might be, that this vorbis wasn't tuned in high bitrates, but this is assumption.
I'd really like to know, which music (can you provide samples and tell, at what positions in the music you can hear the difference easiest ?) you listened it, and how your abx performed.


--------------------
www.High-Quality.ch.vu -- High Quality Audio Archiving Tutorials
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Triza
post Apr 30 2006, 12:20
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 367
Joined: 16-November 03
Member No.: 9867



Yeah. I think very very few people on very very few samples could ABX -q 7 aoTuV beta 4.51

Triza
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Apr 30 2006, 12:26
Post #4





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



QUOTE (goldenear @ Apr 30 2006, 10:41 AM) *
Could it be a decoder/player issue?

Possibly. You didn't mentionned the name of your ABX tool.
You may try with foobar2000 and/or Java ABC/HR. The first one allows a ReplayGain correction and the second correct all volume difference if you want it. I suggest you to try (but usually, volume correction is useless on ABX tests: difference among files is too subtle for being noticed).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jaw2ek
post Apr 30 2006, 12:55
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 30-April 06
Member No.: 30219



Hey! I've always felt this way about vorbis! Here's what I think though. I've just recently been using foobar2000 with replaygain. I've been doing a lot of compression on my files (I need them to sound loud in my car). I'd been using mp3, but would have to eq down the bass to limit distortion. Then I decided to give vorbis a try and have found that there is less distortion on the bass. No eq is necessary.
What I think you are experiencing with vorbis vs mp3 is a difference in bass encoding, which without gain correction is amplified.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Apr 30 2006, 13:05
Post #6





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



QUOTE (jaw2ek @ Apr 30 2006, 12:55 PM) *
No eq is necessary.

But ABX is...
Take a look on TOS#8.
Lack of bass and effects like this are often a consequence of placebo effect. If one encoder really alters a part of the spectrum, it's rather a high one. Anyway, you may have found something interesting which would help developers to tune further their encoder. That's why ABX results and samples may be very useful.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
HotshotGG
post Apr 30 2006, 19:21
Post #7





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



QUOTE
What I think you are experiencing with vorbis vs mp3 is a difference in bass encoding, which without gain correction is amplified.


Last time I checked the source code Vorbis uses lower noise biasing in the low frequency bands. I am not sure about MP3, but from a technical standpoint I think it would just be the opposite. You need to provide an ABX test though, so that we can anaylze these results. It could just be a result of post-processing the audio too with a bunch of Digital Signal Processors.

This post has been edited by HotshotGG: Apr 30 2006, 19:23


--------------------
College student/IT Assistant
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jaw2ek
post May 1 2006, 01:56
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 6
Joined: 30-April 06
Member No.: 30219



QUOTE
Lack of bass and effects like this are often a consequence of placebo effect

Possibly...I have not ABX'd this recently. Past ABX tests that I have done have shown little difference between any codec above 192 kbps. Even at 160 kbps, I only hear a difference maybe 40 percent of the time.
Yesterday, I took a file ripped from cd a few different ways (details are unimportant here) and set them to play at the same level in foobar2000 and heard little difference.
Yes, I could be imagining things, but I've always felt that vorbis files had a little less impact, somehow.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Firon
post May 1 2006, 02:19
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 830
Joined: 3-November 05
Member No.: 25526



So ABX and see if you are imagining it. Wouldn't take more than a few minutes of your time with the ABX component.

This post has been edited by Firon: May 1 2006, 02:20
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Leo 69
post May 1 2006, 03:17
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 121
Joined: 16-May 04
From: UK - Russia
Member No.: 14117



That's incredible. Throughout several messages people claim they are hearing differences without providing any ABX logs and somehow they are not being striked according to TOS8.
A couple of weeks ago I posted a similar way of "analyzing" the differences without ABX logs in this
thread and immediately got punished by a moderator (although I proposed to post my ABX logs if needed and, eventually, I proved my opinion). Why such different attitude ? Сan anyone explain this situation to me ?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jeo
post May 1 2006, 04:05
Post #11





Group: Banned
Posts: 10
Joined: 23-April 06
Member No.: 29898



vorbis sounds better for my taste,is really champion...i don't encode any mp3 a long time(i never liked)!
i'm waiting some standalone dvd-player to encode and listen vorbis in 5.1(better wait).

:-)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
NeoRenegade
post May 1 2006, 04:53
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 723
Joined: 29-November 01
Member No.: 563



You might want to actually read before replying, jeo.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jeo
post May 1 2006, 05:25
Post #13





Group: Banned
Posts: 10
Joined: 23-April 06
Member No.: 29898



QUOTE
The ogg files sound softer than the mp3 ones.

NeoRenegade,
i understood the word "softer" posted by goldenear as "clean". this is what i like in vorbis.
volume is for amplifiers and lots of people "feel" mp3 better because have more "dynamic" (and sometimes more distorcions).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
William
post May 1 2006, 06:02
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 288
Joined: 8-January 02
Member No.: 959



Please, no scientific proofs at all after 13 posts, this thread is getting a little useless.

ABX results please.

And new comers, please read and learn before posting, it is THE way to show that you respect the forum rules.

A lot of TOS #8 violations here.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jeo
post May 1 2006, 06:24
Post #15





Group: Banned
Posts: 10
Joined: 23-April 06
Member No.: 29898



hy William,
i can tell but can't proove my "scientific proofs"....
they are:
5.1 pro logic and 2 stereo amplifiers,
10 speakers,
~60.000 mp3,
???? oggs,
??? ac3-5.1 (audios dvds),
~1500 cdas,
45 years as musician,
35 years as eltronic technician,
all day long encoding music for more than 10 years,(i stop to sleep sometimes)
and the very important part: my ears.

i will that it don't brake TOS #8 violations or any other.

best regards...sincere!
smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
William
post May 1 2006, 08:07
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 288
Joined: 8-January 02
Member No.: 959



QUOTE (jeo @ May 1 2006, 05:24 AM) *
hy William,
i can tell but can't proove my "scientific proofs"....

Since you cannot prove your claim that vorbis sounds better, I have contacted admins and mods about this thread, and I know they will take appropriate actions.

This post has been edited by William: May 1 2006, 08:08
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
picmixer
post May 1 2006, 08:12
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 1428
Joined: 10-April 03
Member No.: 5916



QUOTE (jeo @ May 1 2006, 07:24 AM) *
hy William,
i can tell but can't proove my "scientific proofs"....
they are:
5.1 pro logic and 2 stereo amplifiers,
10 speakers,
~60.000 mp3,
???? oggs,
??? ac3-5.1 (audios dvds),
~1500 cdas,
45 years as musician,
35 years as eltronic technician,
all day long encoding music for more than 10 years,(i stop to sleep sometimes)
and the very important part: my ears.

i will that it don't brake TOS #8 violations or any other.

best regards...sincere!
smile.gif


Well you are breaking TOS 8. Anyone that makes claims about sound quality on this forum is required to post valid abx results. I don't care how many years you have been at a musician, how many speakers you use or how good your ears are.

If you make claims about sound quality then post abx result, period. TOS 8 is there for a reason.

Also I have no idea what the number of speakers you use has to do even remotely with codec quality.

This post has been edited by picmixer: May 1 2006, 08:16
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jeo
post May 1 2006, 08:51
Post #18





Group: Banned
Posts: 10
Joined: 23-April 06
Member No.: 29898



hi picmixer
QUOTE
Well you are breaking TOS 8

reading (again) the tos 8 was found:
QUOTE
Interpretation of a blind listening test

Of course ABX test are not infaillible.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....howtopic=16295#

in the end, the not infalible ABX test is cool and the result of the sound is for ears,then.....i use ears!

wink.gif

QUOTE (William @ May 1 2006, 01:07 AM) *
QUOTE (jeo @ May 1 2006, 05:24 AM) *

hy William,
i can tell but can't proove my "scientific proofs"....

Since you cannot prove your claim that vorbis sounds better, I have contacted admins and mods about this thread, and I know they will take appropriate actions.


i don't want to proove anything,i just posted that:
"vorbis sounds better for my taste "

seems that start some confusion!
sorry!

William,who build the ABX test,in the end use the ears!!! laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Closed 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 October 2014 - 09:10