I've searched the forum for interesting information about Ogg Vorbis. I use it for Internet radio listening (the station I listen to uses aoTuv at -q2), but I've found many old (2002-2005) threads about the supposed stereo collapse vorbis has even at ~128 kbps? Does Vorbis still suffer from these issues or was this solved?Thanks in advance for good answers.
Does Vorbis still suffer from these issues or was this solved?
Vorbis, AAC and MP3 are not that good at lower bitrates. (they where never designed for that)
other than that AAC+ was the king of low bitrates.
I agree that 128 kbps is not a “low bitrate” by the customary usage of the term, especially in the context of streaming.
Thanks, but what quality setting would that be? Is the Ogg Vorbis point stereo really as lossy as FhG mp3 low bitrate intensity stereo?
Quote from: Neuron on 12 January, 2013, 06:58:35 PMThanks, but what quality setting would that be? Is the Ogg Vorbis point stereo really as lossy as FhG mp3 low bitrate intensity stereo?Are you asking if Vorbis is comparable to MP3 in terms of stereo compression? If so, I would say that its a little better.
Because LAME has lossless m/s joint stereo while Ogg Vorbis has lossy point stereo. Or am I wrong?
Quote from: Neuron on 12 January, 2013, 07:56:03 PMBecause LAME has lossless m/s joint stereo while Ogg Vorbis has lossy point stereo. Or am I wrong?You're wrong. Vorbis can do joint stereo as well as more complex methods.
[T]he Vorbis spec provides for, and Vorbis release 1.0 rc1 and later implement a coupled channel strategy. Vorbis has two specific mechanisms that may be used alone or in conjunction to implement channel coupling. The first is channel interleaving via residue backend type 2, and the second is square polar mapping. These two general mechanisms are particularly well suited to coupling due to the structure of Vorbis encoding, as we'll explore below, and using both we can implement both totally lossless stereo image coupling [bit-for-bit decode-identical to uncoupled modes], as well as various lossy models that seek to eliminate inaudible or unimportant aspects of the stereo image in order to enhance bitrate. The exact coupling implementation is generalized to allow the encoder a great deal of flexibility in implementation of a stereo or surround model without requiring any significant complexity increase over the combinatorially simpler mid/side joint stereo of mp3 and other current audio codecs.
If I could honestly differentiate between vorbis q2 and flac 8 out of 13 times I'd be waaaaaaayyyyyyyyy down the rabbit hole shouting about how golden cable tips 'vastly improve spatiality and high frequency response'. That being said, I don't bother with dbt when deciding on a codec setting to use. I just encode at increasingly higher levels until the obvious smearing/artifacts are gone and be done with it. Why bother abxing with fighter beat or castanets? Neither of those are in my music library. And abxing always ends up with me chasing my tail with not so wonderfully produced (but still great music!) albums where I discover what I *think* are artifacts which actually turn out to be part of the recording! Not that abxing isn't important, it surely is when it comes to dispelling audio myths, but it can also give new users false ideas when they get 8 out of 13 guesses 'correct'. For now I listen with my sansa clip, my sennheiser iems, and my sanity intact!