Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.

Poll

What -q setting do you use most at home?

About -q0 or less
[ 3 ] (1.8%)
About -q1
[ 1 ] (0.6%)
About -q2
[ 9 ] (5.3%)
About -q3
[ 7 ] (4.1%)
About -q4
[ 24 ] (14.2%)
About -q5
[ 40 ] (23.7%)
About -q6 or more
[ 49 ] (29%)
I don't often use Vorbis at home
[ 36 ] (21.3%)

Total Members Voted: 216

Topic: What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now? (Read 22472 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Hello all,
A couple of people (HbG & pepoluan actually) suggested this poll, and since no-one else had set it up yet, I thought I would.  I hope it works OK & is easy enough to understand.  Thanks in advance for people's participation, and remember: it's not a competition, it's just that everyone is watching everyone else  .
rc
Vorbis -q3 works for me.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #1 –
I use lossless at home and Vorbis -q5 on the go.  I used to use -q6 but after realising I couldn't ABX -q4 pretty much ever with aoTuV b5 I decided to drop down to -q5.  I save a little more space now.
Nero AAC 1.5.1.0: -q0.45

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #2 –
AoTuV beta 5 at -q2 for home listening, -q1 with ReplayGain irreversibly applied to the files using foobar's converter for my portable 512 MB player, a Trekstor i.Beat organix. I've been using these settings since I conducted some ABXing of my FLAC archive vs. Aoyumi's latest beta, which revealed that I'm generally unable to distinguish -q1 from the originals. Since I had only tested a few samples I moved one more quality step up for home listening, just to make sure that transparency is achieved for the entire audio collection. I haven't trained my hearing for ABXing artifacts so far, hence even the low bitrates resulting out of the -q2 setting sound transparent to me.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #3 –
I think the options should go all the way down to -q-2 since the encoder supports it, and there a significance reduction in bitrate and filesize.

After doing some ABX tests, I found most of the time I could not distinguish -q1 or -q2 from the original. Nonetheless, I encode at -q6 for home. Not because I am hoping that my hearing will improve ;-) but because I would do lossless if I could. Lossless takes too much space, -q6 is a good compromise. Plus some people here claim they can ABX up to -q5. Since I use those tracks as a source for re-encoding for my various portable devices, I better make sure I have a good material to start with.

For portable, I use -q-1. Easy to ABX, but I find the artifacts introduced are minor, and easily ignored in a normal 'noisy' environment. I find -q-2 annoying.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #4 –
-q5 both at home and on the road.  Most of the samples from my collection were transparent at -q4, so I'm just using -q5 for peace of mind.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #5 –
I used to use -q4 until I completed some ABX tests. To my surprise I found that I couldn't ABX -q0, so that's what I now use.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #6 –
I use -q 4 at home 'cause I'd be hard pressed to ABX it.  I use -q 2 while I'm traveling as I have an iRiver IFP-790 which rejects files with bitrates lower than 96kbps, so I just encode using at that bit rate using the managed bitrate encoding system.
I just discovered Opus. Holy mackerel!

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #7 –
@arman68: I briefly considered where to set the "or less" & "or more" settings; I think I got the place of the "or less" option about right, because as I type this a grand total of 1 voter says they use -q0 or less at home and only 3 voters when travelling!

@ all voters: thanks very much for your votes so far!

Looking at the results so far, I'd have to say it looks like Aoyumi's great work on tuning at low bitrates isn't used by the majority of folks around here! 
rc
Vorbis -q3 works for me.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #8 –
Quote from: rockcake on
Looking at the results so far, I'd have to say it looks like Aoyumi's great work on tuning at low bitrates isn't used by the majority of folks around here! 

No, but his tuning at high bitrates is.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #9 –
I have learned to not do any ABX for my personal uses and can live happily with -q3 at home and -q-0.5 on the road

Of course, if it is a scientific listening test, or I want to make some claims re:sound quality, I will do ABX.

But for personal use... ignorance is bliss

Edit: Just to prevent anyone from having the wrong ideas, I do keep archives of my CD's in lossless format (OptimFROG experimental). But only Vorbis -q3 files I keep online on my hard disk. The archives go offline.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #10 –
I used to encode at -q 5 but I realized after abx tests that I had to concetrate a lot to be able to hear artifacts with -q 4 so I use that for listening both at home and with my portable player (mostly in my car).
 

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #11 –
q7, only because of one killer sample, badvilbel, which happens to be in my cd collection.  I thought about just encoding that track with q7, but no. If they don't have the same quality setting throughout, I will go insane, more insane than I already am.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #12 –
q0
q0
listening tests



The 'listening tests' I did back in late 03/early 04.  Encoders used were headac3he (only thing I knew how to change the lowpass with at the time) and out_filewriter for winamp.  Trial and error transcoding from 160kbps mp3 led me to decide on q0 but only after I learned how to boost the lowpass.

To this day I still encode all my music with -q 0 --advanced-encode-option lowpass_frequency=999

If for some reason I need a much lower bitrate (~28kbps dialup stream anyone?) I'll use -q -2 --resample 26000.
Vorbis-q0-lowpass99
lame3.93.1-q5-V9-k-nspsytune

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #13 –
-q6 at home, because when I first tested vorbis, I immediately stumbled upon a problem sample (Farbrausch - The Product) which abruptly became transparent to me at -q6 (But isn't anymore, I can still ABX it now up to -q8, though it's much harder), so I've stuck to that setting ever since, even though I know it's overkill in 99% of the cases.
-q2 on my PAP.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #14 –
See my signature. Lenghty answer here.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #15 –
OK, so it looks like just about everyone who's going to vote has done so, so I'll close the poll shortly (as soon as I figure out how!  ).
Basically, the numbers speak for themselves, but to sum up, a lot of people in HA say they use -q5 to 6 at home, the quality settings are much more varied for travelling use, and a lot decided on their settings by doing their own listening tests.
Again, big thanks to all who participated; I hope this has been/will be useful to some people.
See ya 'round the campus.
rc

edit: well, I can't find a way to close the poll, so someone else (moderator?) will have to do it.
Vorbis -q3 works for me.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #16 –
Quote from: AndrewCottrell on
I used to use -q4 until I completed some ABX tests. To my surprise I found that I couldn't ABX -q0, so that's what I now use.


Quote from: gameplaya15143 on
q0
q0
listening tests

To this day I still encode all my music with -q 0 --advanced-encode-option lowpass_frequency=999


I compromise between you two at -q 0 --advanced-encode-option lowpass_frequency=18.
Apparently 18Khz is my hearing cutoff for just about anything, so I save the extra bits (as opposed to using '999'). 
I think it was brought up before, but many many people can't seem to ABX AoTuV at q0 when lowpass frequency is raised.  All of these answers support this conclusion, oddly enough.  Can anyone look into this?

Edit:  But this stuff:
Quote
-q-1, -q-.5, etc
for some reason I can't stand it... 
Copy Restriction, Annulment, & Protection = C.R.A.P. -Supacon

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #17 –
Quote
I think it was brought up before, but many many people can't seem to ABX AoTuV at q0 when lowpass frequency is raised. All of these answers support this conclusion, oddly enough. Can anyone look into this?

q0 is q0 quality even if HF is not cutted off. Raised lowpass just consume more bits for nothing. I'd recommend q0.5 instead.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #18 –
I use -q6 at home and -q1 for my portable. I found -q1 to retain all the info I need to hear for the road, and it's the lowest and smallest I'll go. Lower -q settings sound too bad even for the road.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #19 –
Quote from: haregoo on
q0 is q0 quality even if HF is not cutted off.

Apparently, I only detected the lowpass.    Maybe I'll ABX the terrible "problem samples" next...
Copy Restriction, Annulment, & Protection = C.R.A.P. -Supacon

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #20 –
I use -q5 on aoTuVb5 home because I read (somewhere... here?) that this was the lowest you could go and still have it be "transparent". I used to use -q6 on vanilla oggenc a year ago for similar reasons. (I have been using MPC for a while.)

I use a vanilla iPod, so I have been using AAC for that lately, but that is non sequitor.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #21 –
I tried to ABX Vorbis on a few audio files that i have on my laptop with my Shure earphones. to my utter delight i was unable to abx even -q1 . hurray for the space savings.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #22 –
Utter delight? Maybe you have old speakers instead of ears

My utter delight is that I can ABX lower bitrates like that, even if I struggle with higher ones, which I once thought had obvious differences.

To quote myself:
Quote
I've had long held views about Ogg qualities, and they're slowly being shattered (I use q7).


I do still use Q7, and it's a puzzle. On the one hand, you have the seemingly ridiculous argument 'q0 is fine'. Do you mean, 128 kbps is about transparent, and aoTuV has lower bitrates so optimised that q0 sounds as good to you as 128, or..?
On the other, you have 'q5 is the lowest Ogg setting to be transparent'. They are mutually exclusive, binarily opposed arguments- they can't both be correct. Good tests are needed I think!

Besides, if this format is to be widely used, I think it's a funny thing to sell as "18 kbps is transparent". Noone is gonna believe it, even if ABX'ed (I'm talking normal users here).

- Spike

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #23 –
Why should one be delighted if they're successful at ABX-ing low q's?

I agree with kanak's outlook: I'm more delighted if I can't ABX low q's for the reasons:

- It means Vorbis is really good at low rate
- It means I can transcode my lossless collection into smaller Vorbis files, thus putting more songs into my PDA DAP

That said, I actually use -q-0.5 on my PDA DAP. I can ABX it easily, but as I said, "ignorance is bliss", I never do that. In fact, I willed myself to not do that, and thus am able to enjoy the songs on my travels on the bus blissfully unaware of any artifacts or shortcomings.

That said, at home I use a higher q value, i.e. -q 3, as -q-0.5's shortcomings are painfully audible on my better desktop speakers. I had been successful in ABX-ing -q 3 against the lossless archive, but again I willed myself to accepting that -q 3 is acceptable. I consciously 'reprogram' my mind to ignore the artifacts, even 'unlearning' artifacts.

What are the commonly used (Vorbis) -q settings now?

Reply #24 –
While I can sort of see what you're getting at, I have better uses for my time, like providing my website's visitors with open source, good quality audio.

It's hard enough to understand differences between Ogg Vorbis and Mp3, without going into ridiculous minutiae like reprogramming your brain to lessen your discernment to save a few MB's of space on your hard disk. No wonder people WTF codec wars.

Seriously man. I'm proud I can ABX such bitrates. I don't care if I have a slightly more full hard drive, because I WANT my hearing to be the best that it can be, and if I'm trying to ignore artifacts, I'll be hurting my ability to detect things like panning (it's really hard to tell whether an instrument sounds better at left 15, or left 30, or left 45 etc).

It sounds very un-audiophile ish, that last argument of yours.

I'm not saying you should listen to Vorbis and be one of those peopele that sort of tsk's and sighes on the bus, saying I heard that filter there, or whatever- that's just as ridiculous, you know you're using lossy formats. But know their shortcomings, and live with it- don't train your brain to basically regress. That sounds like an unenviable feat, although it's morbidly curious in a sense.

- Spike