Skip to main content

Poll

What's your *main lossy* format of choice?

  • MP3
    681 (56.2%)
  • Ogg Vorbis
    214 (17.7%)
  • AAC (MP4, M4A, AAC)
    197 (16.3%)
  • MPC
    46 (3.8%)
  • WMA Standard or PRO
    3 (0.2%)
  • Atrac (any version)
    2 (0.2%)
  • WavPack lossy
    8 (0.7%)
  • LossyWAV + lossless
    6 (0.5%)
  • other lossy format
    0 (0%)
  • I don't use lossy AT ALL!
    55 (4.5%)

Total Members Voted: 1307

Topic: 2008 ripping/encoding general poll (Read 257418 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • 4tified
  • [*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #50
Lossy: Tie Between MP3 and Atrac. MP3 is the most common at high VBR's, very easy to listen to. (plus the mass compatibity) Atrac because it sounds the best to me in lower bitrates.

Lossless: FLAC (Compression Level 8): FLAC is really good on space, decent speed encodes, and is very versitile (then again, I haven't experiemented with anything other than WAV and FLAC recently, so that's bound to change).

One file with CUE sheet: I do this for two reasons....

1. There's just the CUE sheet and the Media File...easier to manage than 10-25 files per folder (OK, so not the best reason)

2. Since I can't make up my mind whether to Append or Prepend track gaps with different CD's, I find it best to archive using the one file so that I make as many different combinations as I want....It's easier to manage the CUE sheet/media files from foobar and such....just personal preference really.

  • grombulk
  • [*]
  • Members (Donating)
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #51
Lossy: MP3 V5 --vbr-new
for compatibility and DAPs

Lossless: FLAC --best
for longterm archiving

Rip:one file per disc with cuesheet or chapters
But not for long,
ripping is still a little problematic, I used abcde -1
single flac archives are hard to convert in Linux
for converting I still use foobar2000, runs fine in wine, but I'd rather go native
also cuesheets are not well supported in most audio-players
on the other hand rubyripper is very nice.

  • xmixahlx
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #52
grombulk, what is the "problem" you get when converting single flac archives in linux?


later

  • kenny01
  • [*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #53
My lossy format of choice is MP3 for universal compatibility -- my hardware players are old and relatively featureless, yet nonetheless they suffice for my purposes. That said, the overwhelming majority of my rips are lossless, I only encode to LAME 3.97 --vbr-new -v4 on-demand.

Lossless-wise, all my music is in WavPack High, sometimes having used -x3, sometimes having used -x6 with no real consistency (and feel no need to enforce it). Once TAK will support seeking without seektables like WavPack, I'll consider a migration to that format.

A possible reason why WavPack could've lost "market share" in the previous year is that its hardware support still lags behind that of FLAC, so users looking for hardware support that are more likely to use FLAC anyway. That leaves users looking for higher compression (than FLAC) but decent flexibility (more flexible than OptimFROG or Monkey's Audio) using WavPack (like me), yet these are the users most likely to switch to TAK eventually.

I've been using WMA standard which, for some reason, sounds very lifelike to me.  To me, there is no harshness, and the sound seems natural.  I find it amazing that besides me, only 1 other person has selected WMA.  I could understand that if it was really bad, but I can't find such a major flaw with it.  When I ABX and compare the codec to the original, it is virtually identical (128kz).  I know it's not exactly like the original, but the difference is very slight.  I'm not pushing WMA here, only commenting on my amazement that only 2 people have selected the codec.  MP3 is also excellent, but for some reason I just like the sound of WMA.  It's hard to objectively explain it, just a general feeling about the sound.

2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #54
AAC
WavPack
disc as one file w/ cuesheets

  • dutch109
  • [*][*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #55
Lossy : MP3 -V5 and Vorbis -q2 but I voted MP3 because it provides a longer battery life on my Samsung player and I love MP3Gain.
Lossless : WavPack -hh -x (I was using Monkey's Audio two years ago but switched to WavPack)
One file per track.

The 2007 general poll was created exactly one year ago and got 921 voters ; I hope this one will last one full year as well and will reach the 1000!
Well, it is done ! 
Vorbis -q2/5 (Android/PC) & WavPack -hhx6m
https://playnoise.com/

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #56
Not really. Total votes / 3 = total voters (or voting people).

  • TREX6662k6
  • [*][*][*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #57
Wow you see the monkeys audio drop in the graph and the gradual increase of WavPack's popularity? Then (most likely) FLAC has an update and people start jumping bandwagons.

Same with MPC (because development is dead?), looks like the majority went to MP3 and a few to Ogg.
Cool graph's.

Ogg, WavPack, 1 file.
  • Last Edit: 05 January, 2008, 09:38:06 AM by TREX6662k6

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #58
Last year I built my first graphs upon the 1200 (400x3) first votes and published the details... for main lossy formats only.
We just reached the 1200 votes few minutes ago. Results could therefore be compared:


LOSSY:  1200 [400x3] first votes comparison (2007-2008)

Code: [Select]
             
            2007     2008
AAC        11.75%   18.00%
MP3        55.50%   51.25%
MPC         4.75%    6,25%
VORBIS     22.50%   20,25%

The most impressive change is for AAC which apparently gained some users coming from the MP3 and the Vorbis basis. Small progress for MPC too (SV8 effect?).



For lossless formats, I filled the table 2007 final results.

LOSSLESS: 2007 (final results) and 2008 (400 first results)

Code: [Select]
          2007     2008
FLAC     59.42%   62.50%
MONKEY    4.65%    4.00%
TAK       0.76%    7.00%
WAVPACK  21.97%   18.00%
Flac is more and more hegemonic. Nice beginning for TAK (which was in beta stage when the 2007's poll started). WavPack regress a bit more (and is now far from his peak reached in 2006).

Of course, these results only apply for a small part of hydrogenaudio's community.

Ah yes, it took 6 days to reach 1200 votes last year. This time: same score after only five days.
Next comparison: on 2008 2009, january 4th maybe
___

P.S. my 2008 votes are: AAC - Flac - 1 file per track
  • Last Edit: 05 January, 2008, 12:26:18 PM by guruboolez

  • lexor
  • [*][*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #59
Ah yes, it took 6 days to reach 1200 votes last year. This time: same score after only five days.
Next comparison: on 2008, january 4th maybe

I don't understand how can next be on the 4th if you posted this on the 5th?

mp3+flac+1 file/track for music (I use aac in movies, but I see this poll as primarily music)
  • Last Edit: 05 January, 2008, 12:33:02 PM by lexor
The Plan Within Plans

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #60
2009 of course. I'm still in 2007 in my head.
  • Last Edit: 05 January, 2008, 01:19:34 PM by guruboolez

  • robert
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #61
my votes:

- MP3, more than good enough to have my beloved music in the office and on my notebook
- I don't use lossless, I've ripped all my CDs to plain wave files on my main computer's HD
- one file per track
  • Last Edit: 05 January, 2008, 01:32:12 PM by robert

  • Bylie
  • [*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #62
  • MP3 for use on my DAP (Cowon D2), transcoded on the fly from my lossless archive;
  • WavPack at the moment using settings : -hh -x1, I'm a former FLAC user but have transcoded to WavPack a couple of weeks ago;
  • One file per track fits my needs perfectly.

  • krmathis
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #63
I don't get this!
OptimFrog s listed, but NOT Apple Lossless... Huh!

Imo this poll is pretty much worthless without listing the most popular codecs!
/me vote for resetting the poll and make it as complete as possible. 
  • Last Edit: 05 January, 2008, 01:56:15 PM by krmathis

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #64
As explained some days ago, I made a mistake and forgot Apple Lossless. I'm sorry. Users have therefore to vote into « other lossless codec » (category which might include few votes for shorten, LA, ATRAC Lossless or any other rare encoder).
Obviously Apple Lossless votes are comprise between 0% and 3% (2.91% ATM; 2.71% last year), which shows how popular it is here on HA.org. If the score stays the same in the next months, then my mistake wouldn't be a big problem.
  • Last Edit: 05 January, 2008, 03:25:59 PM by guruboolez

  • krmathis
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #65
Ok, I get it!
Hopefully Apple Lossless will be worthy its own place in the '2009 ripping/encoding general poll'...

  • ozmosis82
  • [*][*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #66
Lossy: Nero AAC q0.4 (though I prefer Vorbis, personally)
Lossless: FLAC --best, one file per track

I used to use WavPack (Bryant IS a great chap) but switched to FLAC for its hardware support.

  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #67
The 2007 general poll was created exactly one year ago and got 921 voters ; I hope this one will last one full year¹ as well and will reach the 1000!

...

9000 new persons are registered on hydrogenaudio's forums since last poll. I hope that many of them will answer to this new poll ...

The behavior of new  members is hardly predictable. 
2007  921 voters
2006 (lossy format poll)  971 voters http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=43254

It's common to see that in first day there are something like 160 votes.  Then during 2 days there are +160 votes, 4 days +160 and keep going.
First 1 day - 160 votes
Next 2 days - +160
Next 4 days - +160
Next 8 days - +160

Each time it's get twice longer period to obtain the same number of votes.
Looking at the numbers of this poll there should be something like 1000-1100 votes +/- 100-150. I know it's far from any kind of precision. 

  • krmathis
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #68
  • MP3
  • Apple Lossless (other lossless format)
  • One file per track

2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #69
Voted a few days back ...

Lossy: MP3 (Lame -V2, although have been experimenting with -V0 lately). Have about 3000 songs
in the library; played on my PC or through a Soundbridge M1000 via Firefly on an NSLU2, and on the
iPod Classic 80 GB that I received for Christmas.  Also have a stack of MP3 CDs at work that I play on
an old-school Rio MP3 portable CD player. Everything is one file per track.

Lossless: Don't do lossless at the moment, but am considering trying learn how to rip to FLAC with EAC ...

  • Zarggg
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #70
TAK isn't quite as robust as I would like yet...

Please explain what you mean.  Do you have any evidence to back this claim?

<sarcasm>I'm sorry; I didn't realize I needed to provide proof in order to use a certain encoder over another. What is the current "approved encoder" so that I can conform to your empirical standards?</sarcasm>

What I mean is that TAK does not (last I checked) support Unicode tags, which I use a lot.

  • Nick.C
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #71
TAK isn't quite as robust as I would like yet...
Please explain what you mean.  Do you have any evidence to back this claim?
<sarcasm>I'm sorry; I didn't realize I needed to provide proof in order to use a certain encoder over another. What is the current "approved encoder" so that I can conform to your empirical standards?</sarcasm>

What I mean is that TAK does not (last I checked) support Unicode tags, which I use a lot.
In which way does the lack of unicode tags make TAK not robust? What Greynol was requesting was evidence to back up your fairly ambiguous statement....
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 -s h -A --feedback 2 --limit 15848| FLAC -5 -e -p -b 512 -P=4096 -S-

  • greynol
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Global Moderator
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #72
What I mean is that TAK does not (last I checked) support Unicode tags, which I use a lot.

Your concept of "robust" is interesting to say the least.

EDIT: Thanks Nick.C.  I was asking for evidence in the event that "robust" meant something that actually made sense like not being error-prone.
  • Last Edit: 05 January, 2008, 04:46:36 PM by greynol
13 February 2016: The world was blessed with the passing of a truly vile and wretched person.

Your eyes cannot hear.

  • Keykey
  • [*][*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #73
.- MP3
.- Monkey's Audio (High)
.- Image + cue

With that and Foobar I can go to the end of the world 

  • ddawg
  • [*]
2008 ripping/encoding general poll
Reply #74
Lossy: The progress for me has been mp3 -> mpc -> vorbis -> mp3, just switching this year back to mp3. It's just easier, transparent and reasonably fast for me. I hate that I now have old lossy files from previous years that are in different formats, which I have to transcode for different portables. Damnit, should've stuck with mp3 all along.

Lossless: last year I voted for wavpack and the year before that I voted ape but now I voted I don't use lossless formats. I've just gone all mp3 now, everything in v0 and that's it. I decided that I'm not that fussy on quality.