IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
gogo-no-coda Ver.3.11
Nyanko
post Nov 26 2002, 13:17
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 22-December 01
Member No.: 716



gogo-no-coda Ver.3.11 was released.
http://member.nifty.ne.jp/~pen/free/gogo3/mct_gogo.htm
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DigitalDictator
post Nov 26 2002, 13:54
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 313
Joined: 9-August 02
From: SoFo
Member No.: 3002



So GoGo is basically a tweaked Lame 3.88? Not much is said about the quality of this encoder, how good is it really? The quality of the new GoGo 3.11 is equivalent to what - Lame 3.88?

Also, my Japanese (or is it Korean?) is pretty rusty. Is it possible to make a simple homepage in English where you can read a bit about the history, progress and the developer(s) of GoGo..? Maybe that will draw some more attention to it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jospoortvliet
post Nov 26 2002, 14:48
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 174
Joined: 20-November 01
From: Netherlands
Member No.: 508



can't read the page either. and are there any good frontends?


--------------------
Life Sucks Deeply
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
S_O
post Nov 26 2002, 14:54
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 296
Joined: 27-July 02
From: Germany
Member No.: 2821



The english page I found is still with the old version, I downloaded the version from this site and compiled it, itīs based on lame 3.88 and extremly fast:
-q 0 18,84x realtime
-q 2 24,33x realtime
-q 5 38,21x realtime
-q 9 77,89x realtime
all with enabled psymodel at a Athlon Thunderbird 1333MHz
I donīt know how fast xing is, but this sounds much better (-b 128 -m j).
If you donīt trust me test yourself: http://l.b.oltmanns.bei.t-online.de/gogo311.zip
dll and exe. Compiled with ICL6 (/O3 /QaxiMKW /Qip /Qsox-).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
harashin
post Nov 26 2002, 14:55
Post #5





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



QUOTE (DigitalDictator @ Nov 26 2002 - 09:54 PM)
So GoGo is basically a tweaked Lame 3.88? Not much is said about the quality of this encoder, how good is it really? The quality of the new GoGo 3.11 is equivalent to what - Lame 3.88?

From readme_e.txt
CODE
       GOGO-no-coda ver. 3.11 for Windows, Linux and OS/2

                                               updated Nov. 25, 2002
* ABSTRACT

 This software is a mp3 encoder based on LAME3.88,
 which is optimized for Enhanced 3D Now!/SSE/SSE2 and dual-CPUs.


QUOTE
Also, my Japanese (or is it Korean?) is pretty rusty. Is it possible to make a simple homepage in English where you can read a bit about the history, progress and the developer(s) of GoGo..? Maybe that will draw some more attention to it


Their English page is not updated yet...
However you could read babelfished their site.
QUOTE
can't read the page either. and are there any good frontends?

Try WAV2GOGO.

This post has been edited by harashin: Nov 26 2002, 15:08


--------------------
Folding@Home Hydrogenaudio.org Team ID# 32639
http://folding.stanford.edu/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Nov 26 2002, 15:22
Post #6


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3765
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



Win32 binaries are available here: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jfe1205/others.html smile.gif

Edit: BTW, if anyone downloads the Windows '.tar' file, rename it to '.tgz', otherwise you will have trouble decompressing it.

This post has been edited by john33: Nov 26 2002, 15:25


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
S_O
post Nov 26 2002, 15:37
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 296
Joined: 27-July 02
From: Germany
Member No.: 2821



QUOTE
Win32 binaries are available here: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jfe1205/others.html

Which compiler-options do you use? My compile is 0,5x faster (but also twice as big).
QUOTE
Edit: BTW, if anyone downloads the Windows '.tar' file, rename it to '.tgz', otherwise you will have trouble decompressing it.

First I downloaded this lzh-archive, I could see the files, but I couldnīt uncompress it. The other archive could be decompressed by winrar without any problems.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DigitalDictator
post Nov 26 2002, 16:39
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 313
Joined: 9-August 02
From: SoFo
Member No.: 3002



Ah, thanx Harashin. I just couldn't seem to find the download link nor the English page! Must be tired today...

If I'm picky about the quality, can I use GoGo? (given that I wanna stick to mp3). I don't have time nor the equipment to perform any tests myself. I have a stack of CD's that I wanna convert to mp3 and I want to do it quickly. The file size should be around 190-200 kbps. I know Lame is pretty fast but I want Xing-speed and Lame quality. Possible? If so, which settings?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Nov 26 2002, 16:51
Post #9


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3765
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



QUOTE (S_O @ Nov 26 2002 - 02:37 PM)
Which compiler-options do you use? My compile is 0,5x faster (but also twice as big).

Intel 6.0 with '03 /QaxiMK /Qsox- /Qip'. What are you using?

They are compressed using UPX: upx --best .....

This post has been edited by john33: Nov 26 2002, 16:52


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
FuRaL66
post Nov 26 2002, 16:52
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 22-September 02
Member No.: 3423



Hi, I've tried to encode with this Command Line:

-v 2 -m j -vb 128 320 -q 2

Is this OK?

Can Gogo 3.11 reach neraly Lame APS Quality?

Greetz
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Benjamin Lebsanf...
post Nov 26 2002, 16:54
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 761
Joined: 29-September 01
Member No.: 40



QUOTE (FuRaL66 @ Nov 26 2002 - 04:52 PM)
Can Gogo 3.11 reach neraly Lame APS Quality?

no way i think!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
john33
post Nov 26 2002, 16:58
Post #12


xcLame and OggDropXPd Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 3765
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Bracknell, UK
Member No.: 111



QUOTE (Benjamin Lebsanft @ Nov 26 2002 - 03:54 PM)
QUOTE (FuRaL66 @ Nov 26 2002 - 04:52 PM)
Can Gogo 3.11 reach neraly Lame APS Quality?

no way i think!

But at the end of the day, if it is you who is going to listen to them and you're happy with the quality, it doesn't really matter what anyone else thinks! wink.gif It won't be as good as LAME 3.90.2, etc, but it is probably better than the rest.

This post has been edited by john33: Nov 26 2002, 16:58


--------------------
John
----------------------------------------------------------------
My compiles and utilities are at http://www.rarewares.org/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
S_O
post Nov 26 2002, 20:34
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 296
Joined: 27-July 02
From: Germany
Member No.: 2821



QUOTE
Intel 6.0 with '03 /QaxiMK /Qsox- /Qip'. What are you using?

They are compressed using UPX: upx --best .....

Iīm using "/O3 /QaxiMKW /Qip /Qsox-" with ICL6, thatīs nearly the same, I donīt have a Athlon-Thunderbird, so I cannot take advantage of the SSE2 optimization, so it must be randomly slower, because UPX decompresses the program at startup, so the start may take longer, but not the encoding.
I would like know if my compile is faster on Pentium 4 than yours because of the SSE2 optmizations.
Do you know if itīs better to use /QxiM for Athlon A/B/C & Pentium 2, /QxiMK for Pentium 3 & Athlon XP and /QxiMKW for Pentium 4? Because of Qx instead of Qax the optmizations has to be used, the programn wonīt work without them. In HeadAC3he (ac3 transcoder) it is handled with the dlls like that.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Chun-Yu
post Nov 26 2002, 20:52
Post #14





Group: Developer
Posts: 359
Joined: 29-October 02
Member No.: 3652



QUOTE (S_O @ Nov 26 2002 - 11:34 AM)
I would like know if my compile is faster on Pentium 4 than yours because of the SSE2 optmizations.

I would guess no, because the speed critical sections of GoGo are pretty much all handwritten assembly. Plus, SSE2 isn't as cool as SSE because it only does 2 64-bit floats at a time (but it's still pretty cool).

QUOTE (S_O @ Nov 26 2002 - 11:34 AM)
Do you know if itīs better to use /QxiM for Athlon A/B/C & Pentium 2, /QxiMK for Pentium 3 & Athlon XP and /QxiMKW for Pentium 4? Because of Qx instead of Qax the optmizations has to be used, the programn wonīt work without them. In HeadAC3he (ac3 transcoder) it is handled with the dlls like that.

Yes, using /Qx instead of /Qax produces slightly faster code, but it'll crash on older processors! /Qx is especially faster on small functions that could be inlined, since /Qax prevents the compiler from inlining the vectorized function. Using DLLs compiled with /Qx kind of defeats the advantage of using /Qx because /Qax uses a dispatcher kind of thing to select the right version of each function, which is pretty much what using a DLL does. Using a DLL might be helpful for targeting more than one platform (like P-Pro, P-III, P-IV), because /Qax produces only specialized code and generic code (e.g. /QaxiMKW produces code that only runs on P-IVs and generic code for all x86s).

ICL7 is out now (just came out 11/21/2002) - haven't tried it yet (but I sure will). Also, in spring 2003, Microsoft will be releasing version 7.1 of their C++ compiler, which finally can do vectorization with SSE/SSE2 like ICL can - it's currently in beta testing.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
S_O
post Nov 26 2002, 21:48
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 296
Joined: 27-July 02
From: Germany
Member No.: 2821



QUOTE
Using a DLL might be helpful for targeting more than one platform (like P-Pro, P-III, P-IV), because /Qax produces only specialized code and generic code (e.g. /QaxiMKW produces code that only runs on P-IVs and generic code for all x86s).

So it would be better to use /QaxiM for Athlon, because with /QaxiMKW it wouldnīt use any optimization, because SSE and SSE2 is not supported and it only generates optimized (with SSE / SSE2) and non-optimized code? And /QxiM would be even better, but wonīt run on processors without that optimizations? What would happen with /QxiM /QaxiMKW? Does it generate optmizated code (with MMX) and as alternative if avaible also SSE and SSE2?
Iīll try that.
QUOTE
ICL7 is out now (just came out 11/21/2002) - haven't tried it yet (but I sure will).

Do I need to a new license for that or will the old still work?

Now I finally found a bug in GoGo: It supports now Lame-Tags (-lametag on):
-MP3s with tags have terrible sync-errors and lots of other errors (mad-winamp-plug-in)
-It writes in the tag "LAME3.92"!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DSPguru
post Nov 27 2002, 18:40
Post #16


BeSweet Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 235
Joined: 14-December 01
From: sitting on top of a supercompact cardinal
Member No.: 643



if you'll open the .dll in an hexa-editor and look at address 197835 (decimal) you'll see 'LAME3.92'.


--------------------
DSPguru's Webpage - home of BeSweet & The OggMachine.
BeSplit - 7kb of A loseless AC3/AAC/MP3/MP2/WAV Cutter :)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest_SK1_*
post Nov 27 2002, 21:45
Post #17





Guests






I don't get this. So it's fast sure, but
1. it's actually LAME version 3.92 (THANKS DSPguru!), LAME 3.90.2 is a better, recommended version, not 3.92.
2. the newer "unofficial" release with tons of changes and improvements made by Takehiro produces files with MUCH better quality!! Why on earth would you want to encode files in lower quality when there is a much better alternative?
3. so WHAT if it's sooOO00oo fast, if Dibrom's builds' speeds aren't enough for you, i don't know what your problem is, i can understand a need for speed, but this is just useless..

I just don't understand all this GoGo thing.. It's inferior, period. It's like the Audi TT of encoders!! (if you know what i mean..)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
S_O
post Nov 27 2002, 22:33
Post #18





Group: Members
Posts: 296
Joined: 27-July 02
From: Germany
Member No.: 2821



QUOTE
1. it's actually LAME version 3.92 (THANKS DSPguru!), LAME 3.90.2 is a better, recommended version, not 3.92.

see the readme file: This software is a mp3 encoder based on LAME3.88,
which is optimized for Enhanced 3D Now!/SSE/SSE2 and dual-CPUs.

And in the history:

The following bug is fixed.

gogo happens to make mp3-data which can't be played by Windows Media
Player version 6.

supported LameTag output (-lametag on)

lame 3.92 is nowhere mentioned, I guess they just took the lametag-writer-source from lame3.92 and forgot to change the version-string. Look into the source-file vbrtag.c at the function CreateLameVBR, youīll see:
'const char *szVersion = (const char *)"LAME3.92";'
I thought I could simply change that to "GOGO3.11", but encspot etc. finds the lametag by searching for "LAME", so that tag wonīt be found anymore.
The tag has nothing to do with the real version, I can also write LAME3.96 in it, or even LAME5.27.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Guest_SK1_*
post Nov 27 2002, 23:11
Post #19





Guests






OK, my mistake, thanks for clearing that out.. Anyway, this means that it's even worse then..
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sven_Bent
post Nov 27 2002, 23:29
Post #20





Group: Members
Posts: 691
Joined: 15-December 01
From: Denmark
Member No.: 655



QUOTE (SK1 @ Nov 27 2002 - 09:45 PM)
3. so WHAT if it's sooOO00oo fast, if Dibrom's builds' speeds aren't enough for you, i don't know what your problem is, i can understand a need for speed, but this is just useless..

exactly my philosophy
Why do it fast when you can do it right...


--------------------
Sven Bent - Denmark
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
cd-rw.org
post Nov 27 2002, 23:39
Post #21





Group: Members
Posts: 176
Joined: 5-October 01
Member No.: 217



For quite some time I have wondered if any part of GoGo could be ported to LAME for speed benefits. Speed boost would be a good way to market LAME and high fidelity MP3s, and for my PIII-500mhz - I'd like a speed boost for a change. Usually new revisions have slowed things down (for quality of course, but still..)


--------------------
http://www.bitburners.com - We Burn a Bit
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SometimesWarrior
post Nov 28 2002, 01:16
Post #22





Group: Members
Posts: 671
Joined: 21-November 01
From: California, US
Member No.: 514



QUOTE (SK1 @ Nov 27 2002 - 12:45 PM)
3. so WHAT if it's sooOO00oo fast, if Dibrom's builds' speeds aren't enough for you, i don't know what your problem is, i can understand a need for speed, but this is just useless..

I just don't understand all this GoGo thing.. It's inferior, period. It's like the Audi TT of encoders!! (if you know what i mean..)

What's wrong with having a faster encoder available? Maybe I'm in a rush and I just want to get my MPC album transcoded for a portable as quickly as possible... GoGo to the rescue!

GoGo's also ideal for people running music streaming servers. If you want to run multiple MP3 streams along with your Ogg streams (and whatever else), you might need a fast encoder like GoGo.

I'd never use GoGo for MP3 archiving (that's what the alt-presets are for!), but it's still nice to have it around and to see that it's being updated.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
LIF
post Nov 28 2002, 03:26
Post #23





Group: Members
Posts: 232
Joined: 23-April 02
Member No.: 1853



GoGo is my 2nd choice encoder, mainly when using my old machine(PII 233MMX/192 RAM).
To my ears it does a decent job.
I've found these simple ABR settings and both are fast like the "plain" 192 ~ 256 CBR:

-b 200 -a -q3
or
-b 250 -a -q2

I use plain stereo, because I believe GoGo doesnt carry the same JS improvements as the latest Lame compiles.
ABR settings around 180 kbits/s can also be used.

Last: Is it possible to create an GoGo filter for Cool Edit?(.flt)

LIF

This post has been edited by LIF: Nov 28 2002, 03:46


--------------------
"Jazz washes away the dust of everyday life" (Art Blakey)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
twostar
post Nov 29 2002, 16:32
Post #24





Group: Members
Posts: 487
Joined: 5-August 02
From: Manila
Member No.: 2939



QUOTE (SometimesWarrior @ Nov 28 2002 - 08:16 AM)
What's wrong with having a faster encoder available? Maybe I'm in a rush and I just want to get my MPC album transcoded for a portable as quickly as possible... GoGo to the rescue!

How do I do that exactly? I've tried gogo with MPC2MP3 and it won't work (probably because MPC2MP3 is only for lame).

Is there an easier way to transcode MPC to MP3 using gogo?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Chun-Yu
post Nov 29 2002, 16:49
Post #25





Group: Developer
Posts: 359
Joined: 29-October 02
Member No.: 3652



QUOTE (S_O @ Nov 26 2002 - 12:48 PM)
So it would be better to use /QaxiM for Athlon, because with /QaxiMKW it wouldnīt use any optimization, because SSE and SSE2 is not supported and it only generates optimized (with SSE / SSE2) and non-optimized code? And /QxiM would be even better, but wonīt run on processors without that optimizations? What would happen with /QxiM /QaxiMKW? Does it generate optmizated code (with MMX) and as alternative if avaible also SSE and SSE2?
Iīll try that.

Yep. /Qx switches mean that the binary will require those instructions, and /Qax means that it will use them if available. You can combine /Qx and /Qax exactly like you mentioned. /Qx is usually faster, but it will only run on newer processors that have those instructions. Athlon XPs have SSE, so /QxiMK would be good for them (actually /QxK implies /QxiMK so you can save yourself 2 bytes wink.gif).

QUOTE (S_O @ Nov 26 2002 - 12:48 PM)
QUOTE
ICL7 is out now (just came out 11/21/2002) - haven't tried it yet (but I sure will).

Do I need to a new license for that or will the old still work?

I think the old one will still work, but I'm not sure (well, my old evaluation one works - ICL7 is so good that I'm going to buy it for sure). I finally tried ICL7 and it pretty much blows VC++ .NET away when it comes to floating-point stuff. ICL7 seems to be a bit faster than ICL6.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
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 December 2014 - 09:56