Skip to main content

Poll

What codec do you use predominately in your collection?

  • MP3
    447 (46%)
  • Ogg Vorbis    
    266 (27.4%)
  • MP4-AAC    
    123 (12.7%)
  • MPC    
    94 (9.7%)
  • WMA    
    13 (1.3%)
  • Other
    28 (2.9%)

Total Members Voted: 1166

Topic: Your lossy codec of choice in 2006? (Read 141616 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • krazy
  • [*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #25
After using vorbis for a while, it's back to LAME mp3 -V3 for compatibility with quality. Thanks Gabriel and co.

  • lextune
  • [*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #26
Well, I rip WavPack images mostly, but if and when I choose lossy, it's still MPC-Insane for me.
foobar2000 + EAC + Burrrn = Happiness

  • William
  • [*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #27
Vorbis currently. Faster encoding, nice quality, and my DAP supports it.

  • Antaeogo
  • [*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #28
Well, for my own enjoyment - the stuff I rip and leave on my computer for occasional listening to, it's Vorbis.

But for the stuff I take around MP3 is the only choice. Work best with my car stereos, ipod, etc and I don't see myself changing in the next couple of years.

  • loophole
  • [*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #29
AAC - transparent to me at 128kbps VBR and works on everything i have (OS X machine, iPod and SE k750i phone)

  • Insolent
  • [*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #30
MP3.

I can't hear any difference between it and any of the other major lossy formats, so I may as well just stick with the better supported one.
  • Last Edit: 03 April, 2006, 01:16:40 AM by Insolent
</signature>

  • scottder
  • [*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #31
Since I loaded Rockbox on my Nano, ogg vorbis.

  • audio2u
  • [*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #32
Lame @ CBR320 for music (this way, mobile use is overkill, but when I play 'em at home on the hi-fi, they still sound respectable), but I publish my podcasts @ -V5 --vbr-new.
Cheers,
Bruce.
www.audio2u.com
The home of quality podcasts
(including Sine Language, a weekly discussion on all things audio)

  • Jebus
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #33
I am also surprised that AAC isn't doing better here. I would have expected most iPod users would have switched.

  • Cosmo
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #34
MP3

Other codecs lack any advantage that I consider to be significant.

Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #35
Lossless and MPEG-4-AAC for me, and *I really thought more people went that way

I have MPEG-4 in my cellphone, PDA and laptop.
Lossless is kept stationary computer hooked up to stereo.

I use Nero AAC Q2 (~50kbps VBR), it's not transparent but it's really impressive.

Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #36
Ogg Vorbis. For my personal use it's perfect since I've got a hardware player that supports it, and it suits my ears better than mp3 at lower bitrates. As for sh***ng, I really don't care if people don't know what RockBox is (or don't want to buy a hardware player that natively supports this wonderful codec).
Only the best is good enough.

  • grug
  • [*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #37
LAME MP3 of course.

I like being able to play my music on my PC, my Xbox, my phone, my PSP, my iPod, in my car, my home stereo, you get the picture.

I don't have the space to store everything lossless, and I wouldn't be able to hear the difference anyway.
  • Last Edit: 03 April, 2006, 03:16:45 AM by grug

  • vinnie97
  • [*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #38
I think AAC isn't making a showing because of it's overall failure to deliver on quality claims when compared to the competition.  HE-AAC at 64kbps and below seems to be changing that, however (if you can tolerate SBR artifacts).

  • halb27
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #39
mp3 (Lame):
very good quality, low battery drain on mobile DAPs, universal usage.
lame3995n -Q0.5

  • kurtnoise
  • [*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #40
AAC for me but mainly for dvd backup...lossless otherwise of course.

  • carlcamper
  • [*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #41
Ever since buying an iPod Nano (with video playback through iPodLinux of course, and Half-Life, hehe)...... still LAME mp3! (-V2 -new) Highly shareable to all my friends, and transparent enough for me that i use this for archiving (dumb, i know, but, oh well, i get majority of my music "elsewhere", and as long as it is at least the old "Uberstandard" VBR, its fine by me)

  • kkumul
  • [*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #42
MP3 is good enough for everything to me.
I don't have any reason to change my mind so far.
Thanks LAME team.

  • Supacon
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #43
Quote
Quote
AAC is promising too, but it's a pain in the ass to use, and it always costs money in every instance of an encoder or decoder[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=378362"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


What do you mean? You surely know that there are free AAC encoders (iTunes, Real Player) and decoders (aforementioned ones, plus Winamp, Foobar, etc)
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=378369"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I suppose I eggagerated a bit, but the best encoder appears to be Nero, based on recent listening tests, and that one does cost money.  Perhaps that's just being a bit anal, as the iTunes encoder wasn't very far behind. 

As for the free decoders, yes, Winamp & Foobar have free aac decoders.  Most other software out there requires extra payment though... like players for your palm pilot or PocketPC and such.  I'm not really sure how that can be so, however... why do some companies have to pay licensing fees on AAC, and other companies can freely distribute software with support for the codec without paying?

But in any case, this must be one factor that helps to discourage its adoption, especially amongst HA users.

  • Andavari
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #44
MP3 for the obvious reason it's supported practically everywhere. It's too bad open-source formats don't have as much support.
Complexity of incoherent design.

  • jaybeee
  • [*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #45
Any audio that I encode to play on my iriver H120, I use Ogg Vorbis.

But I have A LOT of mp3 files, and still encode to mp3 (LAME '-V 2 --vbr-new') for sharing of non-commercial music only.  LAME is truly great, but Ogg Vorbis creates smaller files and same quality for me... and with Lancer it's quicker too.

  • Emanuel
  • [*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #46
For personal use: Vorbis, on my iRiver H140, Palm TX and laptop.
For public use: Lame mp3.

  • Antonski
  • [*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #47
I would vote for MPC if at least v7.5 was released.
Ogg Vorbis for the present.

  • Hollunder
  • [*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #48
mp3 because it's well known by everyone and because of it's hardware support.

My car player supports nothing else.
Imagine: You host some stuff you just made or recorded and most people can't listen to it because they don't know the codec...

And I use, don't laugh... ATRAC because of my NetMD, damn old thing with a piece of software that's famous for it's crappynes

And flac for archivating/home use

  • singaiya
  • [*][*][*][*]
Your lossy codec of choice in 2006?
Reply #49
Quote
mp3 (Lame):
very good quality, low battery drain on mobile DAPs, universal usage.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=378489"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I don't recall seeing any conclusive proof one way or the other regarding battery drain between formats. I do recall seeing something where battery drains more as bitrates increase, but not inherently due to codec format when using similar bitrates.