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 lossy format do you use on a *regular* basis?

AAC or HE-AAC v1/v2 (.m4a, .aac…)
[ 87 ] (26.3%)
LossyWAV + lossless (.lossy.flac, .lossy.wv, .lossy.tak…)
[ 11 ] (3.3%)
MP3 (.mp3)
[ 84 ] (25.4%)
Musepack (.mpc)
[ 17 ] (5.1%)
Ogg Vorbis (.ogg)
[ 24 ] (7.3%)
Opus (.opus)
[ 75 ] (22.7%)
WavPack Lossy/Hybrid (.wv)
[ 4 ] (1.2%)
xHE-AAC (USAC)
[ 10 ] (3%)
I don't encode or listen to lossy audio on a regular basis
[ 19 ] (5.7%)

Total Members Voted: 213

Voting closed: 2024-01-01 14:33:07

Topic: 2023 Lossy format poll (Read 25659 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #25 –
MP3 - for the "MP3-only" player of my children
AAC - for the car-entertainment system
Opus - for my mobile audio device
.halverhahn

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #26 –
Quote from: birdie on
My preferences for music:

AAC: qaac.exe -v 256 -q 2
MP3: --preset extreme
Opus: --bitrate 256
Vorbis: -q9
This is epic. Almost exactly my choice.
Opus VBR 256 + SoX

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #27 –
I use xHE-AAC (USAC) at 96 kbps (Exhale bit-rate mode 3). Great quality and the bitrate does not bloat on classical music (like Opus).

Works in foobar2000 out-of-the-box on Apple devices (iPhone, MacBook). Keeps my collection (70% classical music) at 230 GB so it can be stored easily on my work laptop (with 1TB SSD).

The Exhale encoder is slower compared to other codecs but once you convert the bulk of your collection it is no longer an issue as I am adding a new album or two from time to time.

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #28 –
quicktime aac 256 kbps for mobile. I like how this codec behaves in a spectrogram when you shovel bitrate at it. Kinda low on storage tho i might need to go opus soon.

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #29 –
Quote from: Corsair on
I use xHE-AAC (USAC) at 96 kbps (Exhale bit-rate mode 3). Great quality and the bitrate does not bloat on classical music (like Opus).

Works in foobar2000 out-of-the-box on Apple devices (iPhone, MacBook). Keeps my collection (70% classical music) at 230 GB so it can be stored easily on my work laptop (with 1TB SSD).

The Exhale encoder is slower compared to other codecs but once you convert the bulk of your collection it is no longer an issue as I am adding a new album or two from time to time.
how do you know it is bloat?

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #31 –
I got interested in LAME MP3 V0 vbr-old btw. Considering the pros this choice has I might stick to it.
Opus VBR 256 + SoX

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #32 –
Quote from: Corsair on
Quote from: Kartoffelbrei on
how do you know it is bloat?

Bloat as an increase in average bitrate on classical music compared to other music genres like pop/rock/metal.

Yep the bloat there to hide a limitation that Opus has, Since I have quiet ambient song at Opus at 192kbps nets a larger than the lossless file. MP3 suffers from bit rate bloat but the -Y switch fixes that hence I force It on V2 ~ V0, Helix seems to have It version of -Y on even at V150. As It stops the 16KHz ~ 22KHz area stealing bits from under 16KHz area.
 

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #33 –
Quote from: birdie on
My preferences for music:
AAC: qaac.exe -v 256 -q 2
MP3: --preset extreme
Opus: --bitrate 256
Vorbis: -q9
Hi
You know i have almost changed my mind , mostly for  AAC: qaac.exe -v 256 -q 2 almost same size of lame V0 , but really great quality
about aac , I guess could be corrupt by many software (not foobar2000) because they keep writeining in their tag , playcount and other stuff , really very hard to fix them
just my cents , because today I performance a test of a my favorite album The Golden Age 's Woodkid in flac , mp3 320k and v0 and qaac -256 -q 2
sorry for MP3: --preset extreme do you mean v0 or an older version of lame?
thanks

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #34 –
Not listed but dts is the only lossy format I use.
Even my mobile device take flac. Storage is so cheap I don't bother compressing stereo.

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #35 –
Quote from: francesco on
Quote from: birdie on
My preferences for music:
AAC: qaac.exe -v 256 -q 2
MP3: --preset extreme
Opus: --bitrate 256
Vorbis: -q9
Hi
You know i have almost changed my mind , mostly for  AAC: qaac.exe -v 256 -q 2 almost same size of lame V0 , but really great quality
about aac , I guess could be corrupt by many software (not foobar2000) because they keep writeining in their tag , playcount and other stuff , really very hard to fix them
just my cents , because today I performance a test of a my favorite album The Golden Age 's Woodkid in flac , mp3 320k and v0 and qaac -256 -q 2
sorry for MP3: --preset extreme do you mean v0 or an older version of lame?
thanks

Code: [Select]
lame --replaygain-accurate -c -p --preset extreme source.wav

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #36 –
WMA PRO at 440kbps. Since none of the options have a 'catch all not thought of', I didn't vote.
Anyway, WMA PRO is the best lossy format I have found that keeps all the information—no matter how unhearable it is.
Processed audio in java and python.

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #37 –
Quote from: For Serious on
WMA PRO at 440kbps. Since none of the options have a 'catch all not thought of', I didn't vote.
Anyway, WMA PRO is the best lossy format I have found that keeps all the information—no matter how unhearable it is.
Try lossyWAV + FLAC.
Opus VBR 256 + SoX

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #38 –
I lost the old Android phone I was using as a DAP last week, so I went back to using my (even older) Rockboxed Clip Zip.

After reading about Musepack's remarkable decoding speed on this device, I gave the codec another go after having used MP3, AAC & Vorbis for almost a decade. I'm impressed by both its quality at Q4 ("radio" quality, ~128kps) -- It sounds transparent to my aging ears -- and the efficiency of its encoder.

Oldie but goodie!

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #39 –
Apple AAC @ 160 for Sonos and my HiBy DAPs.
Apple AAC @ 128 for phones and tablets; purely Bluetooth usage on those.

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #40 –
MPC - for stuff I have in FLAC.
because it's "safe", supports both 44.1 and 48 without resampling, doesn't introduce discontinuities on track boundaries.
and otherwise - whatever I can find.
a fan of AutoEq + Meier Crossfeed

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #41 –
I'm exstensively testing FhG AAC (Winamp) for my single high bitrate archive,
so I'm seriously considering single high quality archive.
So far, FhG AAC seems very robust against problem samples.
At 320k solves pretty much anything (to my ears and equipment) while is still kind of economical.

I'm still using wavpack and appreciate lossy+correction feature.
FSLAC also seems very interesting: resampling -2 preset in older version to 32k yields 240k FLAC with very good quality for portable/phone.

Also tried LossyWav+FLAC but in my experience so far, files created this way are not 100% compatible with hardware/software players (loud clicks, skipping),
so I'm focusing on FhG AAC, WavPack and FSLAC/FLAC.

At the end, probably only FhG AAC as single archive. The simpler, the better. :)
lame --abr 288 -f --lowpass 17 (+ mp3gain@92 dB)

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #42 –
Quote from: synclagz on
Also tried LossyWav+FLAC but in my experience so far, files created this way are not 100% compatible with hardware/software players (loud clicks, skipping), so I'm focusing on FhG AAC, WavPack and FSLAC/FLAC.
Given that lossyWAV output is PCM in WAV format, it follows that the issue is with the FLAC decoding implementation on the player in question.

It was observed some time ago that at least one decoder had issues with FLAC where the number of wasted-bits was not the same for all channels.
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 -s h -A --feedback 2 --limit 15848 --scale 0.5 | FLAC -5 -e -p -b 512 -P=4096 -S- (having set foobar to output 24-bit PCM; scaling by 0.5 gives the ANS headroom to work)

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #43 –
Quote from: synclagz on
Also tried LossyWav+FLAC but in my experience so far, files created this way are not 100% compatible with hardware/software players (loud clicks, skipping)
@synclagz Would you consider running (part of) the FLAC decoder testbench on the device you experienced these problems, and either reporting the results in this topic or adding it to the table of that page?
Music: sounds arranged such that they construct feelings.

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #44 –
Quote from: ktf on
Quote from: synclagz on
Also tried LossyWav+FLAC but in my experience so far, files created this way are not 100% compatible with hardware/software players (loud clicks, skipping)
@synclagz Would you consider running (part of) the FLAC decoder testbench on the device you experienced these problems, and either reporting the results in this topic or adding it to the table of that page?

I no longer have these media players (Dvico Tvix S1 and Mede8er MED500X both based on Realtek CPU RTD 1073.
As far as software players are concerned, Android Pulsar music player usually didn't play it correctly.
I could run few tests with Pulsar and report back (in a few days time).
lame --abr 288 -f --lowpass 17 (+ mp3gain@92 dB)

Just a friendly reminder...

Reply #45 –
...that the polls close in just short of 25 hours, as of now.

Not that there might be a long line building up for it, but it's just that someone, out of mere nostalgia in this new year's eve, may be just checking out the forums,
 just to make sure HA is still alive and kicking after all these years and may have missed on casting their ballot, who knows.

In time: it may as well take a couple of weeks before I can prepare the new graph including this year's results.

Happy 2024 to all!
Nilson
Listen to the music, not the media it's on.
União e reconstrução

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #46 –
Ah dang. i missed it. I use qaac for mobile use. but i may soon be forced to go opus because of space. But hey thats what lossy is all about.

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #47 –
I switched from MP3 lame to AAC (Qaac tvbr 127) about a year ago and I have no regrets. The quality of the music i get is satisfactory, although sometimes I look at lossywav, but I still can't make it work properly (keep getting a bunch of errors)
Beware of people - they can be a source of disappointment

Re: 2023 Lossy format poll

Reply #48 –
For those who dig it, here are the spreadsheet and the graph for the Lossy Format polls started in 2013:





PS: a simple trend line for the number of votes cast is located on the top right corner of the sheet depicting, it seems, a trend of our yearly votes to settle down around the 200-mark -  a far cry from those initial years. Though it should be noted that 2023 was the first time we were finally able to vote for more than one format.

PPS: speaking of trend lines, there are, in the graph, one each for the three most used formats (AAC, MP3 and Opus) as well as one for 'none' (the "barbed wire" one) - which, BTW, might as well be considered a margin of error of sorts, since all formats below its (currently) 6% (except still lingering Ogg Vorbis) are just too *insignificantly small to be properly evaluated - and therefore taken into account, IMHO.

* nothing personal against your fave obscure format, mind you, since I for one also pick at least one of those every year.
Listen to the music, not the media it's on.
União e reconstrução