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: Vorbis better than opus?  (Read 19802 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #50 –
It's not a first time You make unverifiable comments. Actually, there are many of them.
So stop  f talkin  and start actually backup your statements.

Quote from: Triza on
I am with IgorC on this. You only add to the discussion if you back up that claim ...
Thank You!  Most of us here agree on that.

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #51 –
Yeah and when I do what will you do then ?

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #52 –
Quote from: IgorC on
It's not a first time You make unverifiable comments. Actually, there are many of them.
So stop  f talkin  and start actually backup your statements.

Quote from: Triza on
I am with IgorC on this. You only add to the discussion if you back up that claim ...
Thank You!  Most of us here agree on that.

No, Most DO NOT agree. That is a lie . People that know me since 2004 , know I am reliable.
I been here 16 years + . You don't come and tell me how its done .

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #53 –
Quote from: shadowking on
No, Most DO NOT agree. That is a lie . People that know me since 2004 , know I am reliable.
I been here 16 years + . You don't come and tell me how its done .
Huhauhauhauhauhauha
 :D  ;D  :))
Man, just see what people have responded to You in this topic.

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #55 –
I will test your test case as per above. So I will play ball. but none of your links has any ABX proof that they can actually ABX the difference even on that sample. Yeah, I hear it is easy. Then give us some proof.

It seems like a bunch of you are in an echo chamber. This is not how Science works. Just parrotting the same thing along with a bunch of others (who might have picked up this from you) proves nothing. This is not a competition how many others I can make to parrot the same thing.

The thing is Vorbis is better than Lame is 99% by a large margin. You will have a tough going to prove otherwise. So even if there is one sample, at least we should keep in perspective (and have proper documentation of that rare case).

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #56 –
Yes vorbis is better, I never said otherwise. It was another poster.
Since aotuv, tests show its very good. That's what I said.
i said 'may be edge cases' like this that I stumbled on in the past.

Why should you not believe me ?
I find an issue with software ; lossless or lossy. Say wavpack. Okay ?
I contact the developer - a very respectable individual BTW.
I don't get asked to prove anything. He will check it to confirm because there's an
interest to make software better.

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #57 –
Quote from: shadowking on
I contact the developer - a very respectable individual BTW.
I don't get asked to prove anything.
That's how that one particular developer manages things.   That's ok for him.

You are not contacting him right now, You are posting in Hydrogenaudio and You should be TOS8-compliant > Terms Of Service

Even if You were Paul McCartney ( he is even more popular than You) you would still need to provide a downloadable sample and ABX log. TOS8 isn't optional.

P.S. We don't have this discussion with Kamedo2, Guru, /mnt  even me  :P  .... even if they are reliable they still provide all kind of information. No need to ask anything... everything is available!

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #58 –
Yes to prove one codec is better than another codec. I never claimed it.
I said codec vorbis has bug on this sample .  Like amnesia & fsol samples mpc q5 was
worse than lame V2 but no one said mp3 is better than mpc ..

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #59 –
BS; LancerMod(SSE2) (based on aoTuV [20110424][1.3.5])

Q4  - pretty easy. Bitrate 154k

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.5.7
2021/07/09 01:31:39

File A: G:\Hdd-2\Music\abx tests\badvilbel.flac
File B: G:\Hdd-2\Music\abx tests\badvilbel.ogg

01:31:39 : Test started.
01:31:51 : 01/01  50.0%
01:31:58 : 02/02  25.0%
01:32:00 : 03/03  12.5%
01:32:07 : 04/04  6.3%
01:32:10 : 05/05  3.1%
01:32:12 : 06/06  1.6%
01:32:15 : 07/07  0.8%
01:32:19 : 08/08  0.4%
01:32:23 : Test finished.

 ----------
Total: 8/8 (0.4%)


Q6 - I started here and it seemed harder than I remember. Vorbis got better since 07 or I got worse (probably)
So.. after going to Q4 , I decided to do another round of Q6

Q6 -first test. Bitrate 252k

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.5.7
2021/07/09 01:26:47

File A: G:\Hdd-2\Music\abx tests\badvilbel.flac
File B: G:\Hdd-2\Music\abx tests\badvilbel.ogg

01:26:47 : Test started.
01:26:57 : 00/01  100.0%
01:27:03 : 01/02  75.0%
01:27:43 : Trial reset.
01:28:06 : 01/01  50.0%
01:28:16 : 02/02  25.0%
01:28:36 : 03/03  12.5%
01:29:03 : 04/04  6.3%
01:29:22 : 05/05  3.1%
01:30:16 : 05/06  10.9%
01:30:29 : 06/07  6.3%
01:30:48 : 07/08  3.5%
01:31:04 : Test finished.

 ----------
Total: 8/10 (5.5%)

Q6 - part 2, It became clearer.

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.5.7
2021/07/09 01:33:45

File A: G:\Hdd-2\Music\abx tests\badvilbel.flac
File B: G:\Hdd-2\Music\abx tests\badvilbel.ogg

01:33:45 : Test started.
01:34:05 : 00/01  100.0%
01:34:19 : 01/02  75.0%
01:34:30 : 02/03  50.0%
01:34:37 : 03/04  31.3%
01:34:52 : 04/05  18.8%
01:35:17 : 05/06  10.9%
01:35:34 : 06/07  6.3%
01:35:54 : 07/08  3.5%
01:35:56 : Test finished.

 ----------
Total: 7/8 (3.5%)

15 / 18 for Q6

trial reset was I decided to use a different position for playback.
For that position score is 7/8 + 7/8 = 14/16

total all: 8/10 + 8/8 + 7/8 = 23/26

 

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #60 –
Quality 5 bitrate 204k, fairly easy I am warmed up

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.5.7
2021/07/09 02:09:37

File A: G:\Hdd-2\Music\abx tests\badvilbel.flac
File B: G:\Hdd-2\Music\abx tests\badvilbel.ogg

02:09:37 : Test started.
02:09:46 : 01/01  50.0%
02:09:50 : 02/02  25.0%
02:09:54 : 03/03  12.5%
02:10:01 : 04/04  6.3%
02:10:05 : 05/05  3.1%
02:10:09 : 06/06  1.6%
02:10:18 : 07/07  0.8%
02:10:30 : 08/08  0.4%
02:10:33 : Test finished.

 ----------
Total: 8/8 (0.4%)

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #61 –
ani_Jackal3 has just disappeared now that his unfounded statements were laid bare. It is good for the forum that we have less BS.

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #62 –
both not worth attention

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #63 –
 I just want to put my two cents in on this...

As a test, I encoded the same audio file into four codecs, MP3, Vorbis, Opus, and AAC, at 128kbps and 64kbps. Relaying the facts based off of a spectrogram:

* 64kbps Vorbis filtered out frequencies past around 15kHz
* 64kbps MP3 filtered out past 11kHz and 128kbps MP3 filtered out past 16kHz
* Vorbis 128kbps, AAC, and Opus didn't filter out much
* There is a part where the right channel is the inverse of the left channel -- Opus stays the same in quality, AAC filters it out entirely, and Vorbis and MP3 drop greatly in quality.

I personally dislike MP3, because at almost any bitrate, it brickwalls a lot of frequencies. At 128kbps, you really won't be getting much past 16kHz in any audio file, and less if you chose to use simple stereo instead of joint. I can see this in these spectrograms, and hear it too with the 64kbps MP3.

From my personal experience, Opus does the best at low bitrates (64kbps here), almost tied with AAC SBR+PS. However, it's up to you to determine which sounds best to you. Once, I encoded a track with something like 48kbps Vorbis and there was a lot of high frequency content not present in the original song. It actually made the track sound better to me, I shared it with someone else and they didn't like that. It's entirely subjective.

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #64 –
Thx for contributing another baseless assessment on this thread which is rife with this. There is no point looking at the spectogram. The fact you look at the spectogram means that you do not bother to do blind tests, and you learnt nothing on this forum.

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #65 –
Determining which codec is generally better, based on personal experience only, can lead to leveling out the differences between them after conducting a listening test in a nursing home. A burger from McDonald's can satisfy your hunger, just like a home-cooked meal, but the technologies used to facilitate mass production can be harmful in the long run, which neither your tongue nor your stomach will tell you right away. Lossy encoding is about making an approximate copy of the original that is convincing enough, but satisfaction does not mean that everyone stops being interested in what they have lost. Unfortunately, such interest is more often met here with ridicule or a superficial reply like “inaudible therefore useless”, which distinguishes Hydrogen from, for example, Gearspace. Try cutting off the high frequencies that you don't need sharply, say above 16 kHz (obviously, using Butterworth filter with a slope of 72 dB/octave), and you'll find that the remaining frequencies that you hear are affected in a questionable way. Some people tolerate and even enjoy porn, which is also an approximation (of intimate relationships), but the possible consequences can harm your well-being, so consider spreading the awareness instead of “it's up to your skin flute ears”.
• Join our efforts to make Helix MP3 encoder great again
• Opus complexity & qAAC dependence on Apple is an aberration from Vorbis & Musepack breakthroughs
• Let's pray that D. Bryant improve WavPack hybrid, C. Helmrich update FSLAC, M. van Beurden teach FLAC to handle non-audio data
 

Re: Vorbis better than opus?

Reply #66 –
Quote from: Kraeved on
A burger from McDonald's can satisfy your hunger, just like a home-cooked meal, but the technologies used to facilitate mass production can be harmful in the long run, which neither your tongue nor your stomach will tell you right away. Lossy encoding is about making an approximate copy of the original that is convincing enough, but satisfaction does not mean that everyone stops being interested in what they have lost. Unfortunately, such interest is more often met here with ridicule or a superficial reply like “inaudible therefore useless”, which distinguishes Hydrogen from, for example, Gearspace.

The effects of a suboptimal meal (which you're using as an analogy for music consumption) can be measured throughout the day with sensors, blood samples, glycemic index, cholesterol...

Feel free to take as long as you want in the process of ABXing lossless vs. lossy. Measure heartbeat. Physiological response. If you can correlate those changes in bodily response to the actual consumption of lossless vs. lossy audio, it'll make one hell of an interesting read. Hydrogenaudio users will be stoked!