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.
Topic: My impressions on the current state of codec devel (Read 29127 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #100 –
[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']two years after[/span] (first JohnV's message was indeed posted in june 2003).

Do someone have more information about this super secret MP3 encoder and supposed to compete with LAME?


Anyway, it's interesting to compare impressions about future and what really happened.



- MP3: still here, and even bursting with health! The format has apparently an iron constitution [let's see in two years if my impression will be still true  ], and development is still going on with both LAME 3.97 and LAME 4.00. And don't see any other competitor to LAME; all others have apparently gave up, and everything leads me to believe that it's also the case for the rumored one announced in the beginning of this thread. Being officially replaced by another standard (AAC/MPEG-4) hasn't harmed the popularity of MP3.


- AAC: a lot of development, but also some disappointment. faac is in hibernation; and most progress were apparently focused on low and ultra-low bitrate improvements (HE profile v.1 and v.2: SBR and Parametric Stereo) not very interesting for my purpose. But I consider the hardware situation as the biggest source of disappointment. If we except mobil phones, few device dedicated to music are supporting AAC (though iPod is undeniably hegemonic on the market). I've genuinely expected much more support in 2005 especially from big companies like Creative; Apple is quite alone to support AAC and other companies are apparently not in hurry to implement AAC decoders.


- Vorbis: development started again at the end of 2003 with Nyaochi "Modest Tuning", Aoyumi "aoTuV", QuantumKnot "QK" series and "ITP" switch; and the "Lancer" project is also very impressive. About hardware players: despite of not being an ISO format, Vorbis has reached in my opinion better support than AAC for dedicated hardware audio player (more JukeBox, more flashmemory players, more companies supporting Vorbis: iRiver, iAudio, Samsung, Olympus and plenty of other smaller companies, unfortunately not present in all markets).
Both progress are something I also didn't expect at all two years ago.


- MPC: JohnV impressions were here correct. Development was slow during 25 months. The MPC project was resurrected, but there are no real changes between the situation in 2003 (1.14 as beta, 1.15r as alpha) and 2005 (1.14 as beta, 1.15v as alpha). JohnV talked about possible SV8 and even SV9; then there was the SV7.5 project, still in project apparently...


- WMA: still here, and even growing presence due to the new market of music distribution. The format have consolidate its basis not by improving quality but by offering a complete set of DRM tools (usual DRM, Janus, etc...). Too bad that WMAPro hasn't succeed to WMA standard...

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #101 –
Quote
[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%']two years after[/span] (first JohnV's message was indeed posted in june 2003).

Do someone have more information about this super secret MP3 encoder and supposed to compete with LAME?


Sure.  The people involved in working on it for the most part disappeared.

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #102 –
Wasn't Schibatch Naoki the main developer of this project? Because he seems to be still present and released recently an updated SSRC code.

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #103 –
While being in a constant “almost-no-room-for-improvement” situation, Lamedevs just make wonders.
It would be no surprise, if in a couple of years Lame will still be one of the most advanced encoder, going on par with all the “new and shiny” formats (which will truly be a shame for their developers).

One more thing I would like to point at is Vorbis II. Will there be such a thing?
And if Aoyumi (and maybe somebody else) will keep working on Vorbis I, it will be much more… uhm… strange situation than with theoretical Musepack 7/7.5/8 streamversions or already upcoming Lame 3/4.
Infrasonic Quartet + Sennheiser HD650 + Microlab Solo 2 mk3. 

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #104 –
Quote
While being in a constant “almost-no-room-for-improvement” situation, Lamedevs just make wonders.

True. But for unknown reasons, some people are convinced that 3.90 should represent the Himalayan top of MP3 evolution.

Quote
It would be no surprise, if in a couple of years Lame will still be one of the most advanced encoder, going on par with all the “new and shiny” formats (which will truly be a shame for their developers).

I doubt so. Currently, LAME mp3 appeared as inferior to some competitors at low, mid and high bitrate. And I'm tempted to say that LAME have more maturity and therefore less headroom for further improvments than AAC, Vorbis or WMAPro.
With time, the gap between MP3 and competitors would probably be longer. But recent progress made on mid/low bitrate will probably keep MP3 attractive for a good additional time.

Quote
One more thing I would like to point at is Vorbis II. Will there be such a thing?

You've probably noticed it (this thread is a good illustration): there are many rumors or cancelled projects in the little world of audio compression. Introducing something called Vorbis II and not compatible with Vorbis I decoder should bring a lot of confusion to consumer.

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #105 –
I fail to undestand Xiph people: why are they so careless about their encoder? Nobody has made anything significant to improve quality for three (!) years (since the release of 1.0) except for the “third party” enthusiasts like Garf, Aoyumi, QuantumKnot and others. IMO, it is them who we need to thank for what Vorbis is now, not Xiph.
Infrasonic Quartet + Sennheiser HD650 + Microlab Solo 2 mk3. 

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #106 –
I'm not a vorbis-fan, but maybe development of vorbis should officially be transfered to those "third party devs", while xiph only cares about "evangelism" and politics. Vorbis has lots of potential and could be in a much better situation today if xiph wouldn't play the "dev by proxy"-game and instead make things clear: They dont want to develop vorbis? Okay, then let someone else take over it, instead of creating a vacuum of uncertainity.

- Lyx
I am arrogant and I can afford it because I deliver.

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #107 –
Totally agreed.
Infrasonic Quartet + Sennheiser HD650 + Microlab Solo 2 mk3. 

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #108 –
Quote
I fail to undestand Xiph people: why are they so careless about their encoder? Nobody has made anything significant to improve quality for three (!) years (since the release of 1.0) except for the “third party” enthusiasts like Garf, Aoyumi, QuantumKnot and others. IMO, it is them who we need to thank for what Vorbis is now, not Xiph.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

XIPHMONT answered to this question in the current thread ([a href="http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=10313&view=findpost&p=114435]here[/url]). It was Emmett's fault...
Quote
Slow development had nothing to do with Theora. Slow dev was due to Emmett overselling my time to embedded Vorbis devolpement contracts to such an extent that we fired him months ago, and we're *still* committed to contracts that may well have me busy through the summer.


Emmett got the blame, was fired, but XIPH didn't improve vorbis core since, limited the work to fix some bugs in bitrate management 

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #109 –
For me lossless audio has captured me as it keeps a bit for bit copy of the track.
I think lossy is being down played abit because of this. I would like to see flac as supported as MP3. And Vorbis supported  more as well.

The Vorbis web site has not changed for a Long time and if it were not for this site
I would of thought is was dead !
Death is the one thing we all face

My impressions on the current state of codec devel

Reply #110 –
I think Vorbis I is doing quite well for now thanks to Aoyumi. At least better than I expected. (See Guru's latest 80 kbps test).

If I were in Monty's position I'd be working on Vorbis II as well and ditch Vorbis I tuning. Some of his comments do really scare me a bit, though. I wonder if he's really going to go through the hassle of using Wavelets, for example.

Quote
The original papers discussing tone/tone and tone/noise masking are a good start.  Ehmer's papers in the 1950's in the JASA are the original source of much of the thinking (and hard numbers) in the Vorbis psychoacoustics, but honestly, this starting point is obsolete in modern Vorbis encoders.  Vorbis II is moving an entirely different direction yet again.


What do you make of that ?
(This is more a rethoric question)

Sebi