I know currently the aoTuVb2 encoder is the best one, but the aoTuV"b2" mean it is beta 2 isn't it? Should i use the beta encoder to archive audio?
WMA, Blade, Plugger, VQF are not beta, but it's not a reason to use it. On the other side, most MPC encoders are beta, and quality is fine.
aoTuV was tested by some members of the community. It's a great improvement, compared to "stable and final" 1.01. It's safe to use it, though it's in beta stage. For archiving, I nevertheless suggest to take a look on the "megamix" version, merging aoTuV code with GT3b2 and QK32, and allowing in consequence better transients (less pre-echo, more sharpness).
You could also take a look on CVS encoder 1.1. It's in Release Candidate (RC) stage, one step behind on safety compared to simple "beta" This 1.1RC1 merged aoTuV tunings in official branch.
Such is the rapid state of Vorbis development now, with 1.1 RC1 out just a week or two after Megamix, I wonder if I should do a Megamix 2 based on this new 1.1 RC1 or should I wait for the final 1.1 version to be released? The only benefit I see is to have bitrate management working properly, as well as some bugfixes. But the big disadvantage I see with this is that I will be effectively adding another version of Vorbis on top of the many we already have, that will cause a lot of confusion.
Wait. Probably won't be much longer until 1.1 final.
Such is the rapid state of Vorbis development now, with 1.1 RC1 out just a week or two after Megamix, I wonder if I should do a Megamix 2 based on this new 1.1 RC1 or should I wait for the final 1.1 version to be released? The only benefit I see is to have bitrate management working properly, as well as some bugfixes. But the big disadvantage I see with this is that I will be effectively adding another version of Vorbis on top of the many we already have, that will cause a lot of confusion.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225043"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As if it hasn't already hehe. Nothing is ever perefect though you try and that's what count's ;-). Should be a full time job tweaking Vorbis encoder on problematic samples.
The term "archiving" usually suggests lossless or
high bitrate encodes, and AFAIC aoTuVb2 shines
at the lower bitrates. Shouldn't you be sticking to
to GT3b2 (if vorbis is your choice for archiving) at
least until newer encoder versions e.g. 1.1 are
thoroughly tested?
GT3b2 is also Beta.
For archival, I'd rather do lossless, but if you want officially stable Vorbis, go with Xiph's 1.0.1 (http://www.vorbis.com/files/1.0.1/windows/vorbis-tools-1.0.1-win32.zip).
Well, will 1.1 be same quality as aoTuVb2? I mean - ALL tunings added? Anything else (tunings!) added?
Ok, i will wait until 1.1 final.
Another question, is somebody know the ogg vorbis(aoTuVb2 or 1.0.1 version) each bandwidth for each bitrate?(Sorry, my english is very bad )
(example: 128kbps, the bandwidth is xxxxxHz and so on), or where can i get those information?
Thanks for everybody who join in this topic.
Vorbis encoder keeps by defaut the original bitrate from -q -1 (45 kbps) to -q 10 (500 kbps). In other words, CD ripping will stay at 44100 Hz, whatever the setting.
EDIT: wrong comprehension of the question.
Another question, is somebody know the ogg vorbis(aoTuVb2 or 1.0.1 version) each bandwidth for each bitrate?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225515"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
for aotuvb2:
q-2
13,90012 khzq-1
15,1 khzq0
15,10007 khzq1
15,80007 khzq2
16,50007 khzq3
17,20017 khzq4
18,90012 khzq5
20,10279 khzq6
48,095327 khzq7-10
999,0 khz
GT3b2 is also Beta.
For archival, I'd rather do lossless, but if you want officially stable Vorbis, go with Xiph's 1.0.1 (http://www.vorbis.com/files/1.0.1/windows/vorbis-tools-1.0.1-win32.zip).
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=225138"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
FYI, Monty has always stated that the latest committed source code is the most stable; that would be 1.1RC1.
Sorry for guruboolez, cause i let him misunderstand...
And thanks for sciller answer my question!