• LossyWAV - 100 kbps or less
• LossyWAV - 200 kbps => The lowest bitrate is around 230 or 250 kbps, and I believe this setting is still experimental.

Now I see!

Basically you were just blinded by the green-eyed monster for simply not having a poll to call yours yet!

That explains your OTT rant over there and the half-arsed, rushed, non-existing/imaginary settings options here - amongst the whole 92(!) of them.

Oh, boy!

Edit: Good luck with getting this "sticky on main forum page?"
Edit 2: Gee! Why didn't you say this was such a matter of honour to you in the first place?
I could've easily handled it over to you - just like I offered to take over from IgorC, since we'd been collaborating for a few years back then.

Quote from: includemeout on 2024-11-11 12:39:59

Now I see!

Basically you were just blinded by the green-eyed monster for simply not having a poll to call yours yet!

That explains your OTT rant over there and the half-arsed, rushed, non-existing/imaginary settings options here - amongst the whole 92(!) of them.

Oh, boy!

Edit: Good luck with getting this "sticky on main forum page?"
Edit 2: Gee! Why didn't you say this was such a matter of honour to you in the first place?
I could've easily handled it over to you - just like I offered to take over from IgorC, since we'd been collaborating for a few years back then.

You are not polite and bully. And you have just attacked me.
It has nothing to do with your poll and you don't even know what this poll result will be used for.  I was planning to re-open such poll a few years ago, it's not even a new one.

You don't know who I am, and my involvement into codecs development and collaboration as you say with  Kamedo2 and IgorC on background. 

It's usual to see some old members bulling a newer as pretending/assuming they have more experience
But be careful to bulling a new comer, because it can be actually somebody  who were here  longer than you and made more for this community than you.

For my target devices, I create mostly AAC, results would be in the 100-220kbps range (technically depends on the music, eg transients etc...., and depends on my chosen conversion). I use q73 .. q109.

I think you should have made less choices. Put together more bitrate ranges. If bitrate at all.

I just wanted to point out that at least two of them might not be relevant:
• WavPack Lossy/Hybrid (.wv) - 100 kbps or less : With CD material, the lowest bitrate is approximately 200 kbps.
• LossyWAV - 100 kbps or less
• LossyWAV - 200 kbps => The lowest bitrate is around 230 or 250 kbps, and I believe this setting is still experimental.

Excessive granularity is a less problem in my opinion

Is the question "Do you Use" as in playing those files or Do you Encode?

First not being a choice if you purchase or stream online. Second being an actual usage for encoding.

My view is that there is no reason to "use" MP3 any more. AAC-LC should be the default minimum. Anything below 128Kbps goes to xHE-AAC or Opus. And Musepack for 320Kbps and above although one could question why not just go directly to lossless.

I only wish there is an codec that could do AAC-LC 256Kbps quality with 128Kbps.

In my opinion, very low quality sounds are unnecessary nowadays. Therefore, in lossy situations, 320 kbps and above is much more logical. So the real comparison should be here.

128 kbps may be enough for you. But it is definitely not enough for my usage conditions and sound systems. That's why we prefer Lossless in most cases.

Quote from: genuine on 2024-11-17 14:39:47

128 kbps may be enough for you. But it is definitely not enough for my usage conditions and sound systems. That's why we prefer Lossless in most cases.

128kbps may be not enough for you, but MP3 should be enough for everyone at higher bitrates, so there's absolutely no need to use lossless.