Skip to main content

Topic: Why no Vorbis 2-pass? (Read 21037 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Why no Vorbis 2-pass?
Reply #50
2pass encoding is only usefull to speed up the process of getting the most quality out of a given file size (I say 'speed up' because trial & error is the alternative method).

I have yet to see any circumstance where 2pass audio encoding is more usefull than 1pass vbr 
Does anybody know of any at all?

For video encoding 2pass is very usefull, since the trial & error method is extremely time consuming.
Vorbis-q0-lowpass99
lame3.93.1-q5-V9-k-nspsytune

  • HbG
  • [*][*][*][*]
Why no Vorbis 2-pass?
Reply #51
What about listening tests where a specific average bitrate for the collection of samples may be desired?
Veni Vidi Vorbis.

  • fpi
  • [*][*]
Why no Vorbis 2-pass?
Reply #52
I have yet to see any circumstance where 2pass audio encoding is more usefull than 1pass vbr 
Does anybody know of any at all?


Rehuff can be used only with a two pass encoding (altought this is not the same two pass of video encoding, this is really a two pass).
More infos on rehuff:
http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/vorbis-dev...ust/018522.html