Hydrogenaudio Forums

Hydrogenaudio Forum => Polls => Topic started by: IgorC on 2011-02-17 19:23:52

Poll
Question: What are your *main lossy* formats of choice?
Option 1: MP3 votes: 250
Option 2: AAC (M4A, MP4, AAC) votes: 128
Option 3: Ogg Vorbis votes: 87
Option 4: MPC votes: 23
Option 5: LossyWAV + lossless votes: 7
Option 6: WavPack lossy votes: 7
Option 7: CELT votes: 3
Option 8: WMA Standard or PRO (lossy) votes: 2
Option 9: other lossy format votes: 1
Option 10: I don't use lossy AT ALL! votes: 32
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: IgorC on 2011-02-17 19:23:52
It was a long time since guruboolez's poll in 2009 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=68338). I hope he is not angry that I copy/paste his poll.

The difference with previous polls is that this one is multiple choice. You are free to choose a few codecs. Like Codec A for DAP and Codec B for PC.

I would ask administrators, please, move topic to poll section. I could not create a topic in poll section for some reason.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: marc2003 on 2011-02-17 19:38:41
lossless: tak -pMax. i'm a recent convert having previously used flac. but then i looked at my usage: i only use foobar2000 for playing music at home so it just made sense. i don't need open source/cross platform/hardware support that other codecs offer.

lossy: ogg vorbis @ q5 for my sansa clip
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Sebastian Mares on 2011-02-17 20:05:06
I rip to 256 kbps AAC via iTunes and have iTunes transcode the files to 128 kbps when syncing to my iPhone / iPad. No longer use lossless.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: zver on 2011-02-17 20:48:34
Well,i used lossy before hd space become really cheap[mpc or oggV] and don't use portable-iPod so i consume    lossless these days only.If its lossless allready[net source]i just leave like that;in case of shorten or wav or if rip cd muself i use tak @ p2 or p4..
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Wombat on 2011-02-17 20:54:54
Seems like i didn´t change anything from the last poll. I still use the same Hardwareplayer that plays flac natively so i encode flac but use the fast CL GPU encoder and as side effect squeezes the max out of the flac format.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: spoon on 2011-02-17 22:24:16
FLAC as it is the one chance to stop Apple Lossless or WMA-L becoming the standard...
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: MuncherOfSpleens on 2011-02-17 22:44:53
My main (archive) library is all lossless WavPack, full images with embedded CUE sheets. I would use TAK, but I don’t feel comfortable using a completely closed format for archival. I also considered FLAC, but it’s way too picky about what you can store in an embedded CUE.

On my laptop I use AAC, encoded with Nero. It plays anywhere.

I use Musepack SV8 on my portable (thanks to Rockbox). It sounds perfectly fine to me on the “radio” setting, and my battery lasts forever. I wish this format were being actively updated, but it’s great how it is, honestly.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: BoraBora on 2011-02-17 22:51:51
Same as last year (and probably next year): 100% FLAC and one file per track.

* A DAP would be useless for me, so no need for lossy.
* With HD capacities still growing, my quest for the best compression ratio is over for good.
* I heavily rearrange my CD tracks, so the one-file-per-album solution wouldn't make sense.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: eevan on 2011-02-17 23:02:24
TAK and Vorbis mainly for Rockboxed Fuze.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: IgorC on 2011-02-17 23:15:18
Depending on content and needs:
Apple and Nero AAC VBR 192-256 kbps.
LAME -V2/V0/320 kbps
FLAC
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: guruboolez on 2011-02-17 23:36:14
I'm not angry at all  I'm very happy to see a new poll on this subject. Thank you!

I didn't change anything during the last years:
- AAC, which seems to be more and more supported outside Apple's ecosystem
- FLAC, which has a good compatibility with hardware players and an excellent one with software
- one file/track
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: punkrockdude on 2011-02-17 23:46:18
I use mostly ogg but it was a difficult decision because I have used AAC a lot too. What made me pick ogg is because I have started to use it again for my HTC Desire HD cell phone and if I consolidate projects in Reaper so that I can mix for fun or send to bands to preview what they just tracked, then I output the projects to ogg.

An ABX i did not long ago between Ogg aotuv, Nero AAC and Quicktime AAC showed ogg to be best (for me) at around 128 kbps and that was even when I set aotuv encoder to lowpass 99 letting most frequencies pass (if i am correct). I will do some higher bitrate ABX's some time. One new codec that I am really impressed by is LossyWAV.

When it comes to lossless I use FLAC. I also record projects in Reaper with FLAC (24 bit) and it makes an enormous difference to disk space being used. Just too bad that FLAC doesn't support 32bit float so that I could also use it when I do bouncing/rendering clips with effects which usually end up as 32bit float. WavPack offers 32 bit float but I stay FLAC since it is, if I understood it correctly, a lot more common than WavPack. Regards
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: quackalist on 2011-02-18 00:22:06
Don't think it's changed since 2009...

FLAC, one file per track &
MP3 V0, cause I've got golden ears   
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: _Raziel-BG on 2011-02-18 01:43:44
Lossy: Ogg Vorbis
Lossless: FLAC
Ripping mode: one file per track
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: carpman on 2011-02-18 01:49:18
Bulk of library is either TAK or LossyTAK
Loose tracks = MP3 -V 0
Portable = MP3 -V 5
One file per track.

C.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: zorba on 2011-02-18 09:18:13
I rip to 256 kbps AAC via iTunes and have iTunes transcode the files to 128 kbps when syncing to my iPhone / iPad. No longer use lossless.


Same same here.
Simplicity & quality.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: DARcode on 2011-02-18 10:33:14
WavPack hybrid all around: lossless at home and lossy on my Android smartphone/PMP, keeping a copy transcoded to LAME MP3 V2 in case I need to use my files in WV unfriendly environments, one file per track.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Synthetic Soul on 2011-02-18 11:52:40
I haven't changed:

One file per track LAME MP3 -V5 for car/computer/iPod

Single Wavpack Image with embedded cuesheet for my CD archive.


If I download FLAC or Apple lossless tracks I convert to Wavpack.  I do have FLAC versions of the music (http://khakifibre.bandcamp.com/) a friend and I make, as I have more chance of that being useful to 3rd parties.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: db1989 on 2011-02-18 12:58:11
I used to keep an archive of WavPack lossless images and transcode to my MP3-only player using LAME -V2 --vbr-new. When I moved to an iPod/iTunes, I ended up biting my tongue and jettisoning the lossless archive—and, for some reason, I decided to rip new tracks to AAC at 256 kbps (iTunes Plus preset). This risked being a problem (and left me wondering why I had bothered) when I had to replace my iPod, but in the end I bought a player that supports AAC (as well as FLAC, should I ever want to use lossless). Still, I wish I had just stuck with MP3 for future-proofing, just in case, although AAC may or may not be on its way to being generally supported.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: misuzu on 2011-02-18 13:22:57
MP3  :
I use 320K or V0, because large hard disk
portable V4

FLAC :
-8 -A tukey(0.5) -A flattop 
-6  -l 12 -A tukey(0.5) -A flattop

one file per track
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Steve Forte Rio on 2011-02-18 13:29:25
TAK 2.1.0 -p4m

Musepack --quality 5

One file per track
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: krafty on 2011-02-18 14:04:20
Lossy: None. Reason is that I don't have a portable, and not planning to get one.

Lossless: FLAC. Reason is that is well supported in Linux. I also like WavPack but the problem started when I needed Audacity to edit a file, or tried to burn them on the fly with K3B. I know there are workarounds, but I prefer things out of the box. Anyways, it's not WavPack's fault. I just wished it supported more hardware.

File scheme: One file per track. Reason: No cuesheets, because it seems that you get restricted to only a couple of software capable of reading cuesheets. I use Quod Libet to play files.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: The Seeker on 2011-02-18 17:55:49
FLAC, level 0. For archival purposes.
Ogg Vorbis, q5.0. For home and portable listening.

Both formats are one file per track.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Dakeryas on 2011-02-21 22:12:58
Lossy : for both my Cowon J3 and my computer: Nero AAC 1.5.4 at q.65 (~240 - 265kbps).

Lossless: for archiving (one file per track copied to my external hard drive): Monkey's Audio v3.99 (4.06 for the whole bundle) Extra High which is not that slow to encode with an i7  .




Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Billytheonion on 2011-02-22 03:59:34
256 AAC with XLD. For Use iTunes iPhone Apple TV. I didn't see the point of keeping my lossless files deleted them all.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: bt_escm.9 on 2011-02-22 07:56:05
CD archival - FLAC -6

iPod - QuickTime TVBR AAC ~130kbps

One file per track
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: The Seeker on 2011-02-22 13:24:56
I didn't see the point of keeping my lossless files deleted them all.


You may come to regret that, I know I did.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: dilpill on 2011-02-22 14:54:45
I use FLAC for archival and listening on my desktop computer, and Vorbis -q5.0 for portable and network listening.

I have a few tracks in AAC and MP3, but all of my lossless music is in FLAC.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Billytheonion on 2011-02-22 14:55:10
I don't think AAC is going anywhere in my life time. Not like im going to wake up one day and Apple announce they no longer support AAC.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Yuna on 2011-02-27 22:48:40
For archival purpose : FLAC -5

For portable : mainly MP3 -V 2 however, I have some of my collection in AAC and OGG.

Rip : One file per track

No trancode for lossy format but for lossless I convert all APE, ALAC, WV, TAK found on the web in FLAC -5. With only one lossless format my collection is easier to manage.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: sh1leshk4 on 2011-02-27 23:09:10
TAK for archival, MP3 & AAC for portables.

TAK really has gone a long way ever since its announcement on April 1st a few years back (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=43179); really wonder how many people initially thought that thread was an April fool's. =b
It's pretty much the ideal lossless format regardless of it not being an open source one.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Yuna on 2011-02-28 01:26:10
TAK for archival, MP3 & AAC for portables.

TAK really has gone a long way ever since its announcement on April 1st a few years back (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=43179); really wonder how many people initially thought that thread was an April fool's. =b
It's pretty much the ideal lossless format regardless of it not being an open source one.


There is no ideal format either lossless, lossy, open source or not nowadays. The best format depends on the use made of it and everyone's opinion. So it's very subjective. I don't know enough the TAK format for judge it.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: sh1leshk4 on 2011-02-28 01:56:54
The best format depends on the use made of it and everyone's opinion.

You said that yourself, unless you didn't count my opinion as an opinion; whichever suits your argument best, then.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: hellokeith on 2011-02-28 05:22:06
FLAC as it is the one chance to stop Apple Lossless or WMA-L becoming the standard...


From all appearances, Microsoft has abandonded any further work on audio.  And there does not appear to be a Windows Media group any more.  So I would not worry to much about WMA-L.  Although, if it were not so restricted, it would be a great standard.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: kode54 on 2011-02-28 05:33:51
Lossy : for both my Cowon J3 and my computer: Nero AAC 1.5.4 at q.65 (~240 - 265kbps).

Lossless: for archiving (one file per track copied to my external hard drive): Monkey's Audio v3.99 (4.06 for the whole bundle) Extra High which is not that slow to encode with an i7  .


Why not Insane?

I don't think AAC is going anywhere in my life time. Not like im going to wake up one day and Apple announce they no longer support AAC.

The Almighty Apple would never do that to us!
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: yourlord on 2011-03-01 22:23:38
I rip to FLAC, 1 file per track. When listening to audio on my computers, I listen to the FLAC's.

When I want to transfer music to my DAP's I do batch conversions to vorbis -q2.

If I'm transferring to a DAP that doesn't support vorbis (I don't own any), then I encode to mp3 using lame -V2.

The reason I use FLAC is I want to be able to access my music collection 30 years from now, and with FLAC I know I will be able to. Openly documented and unencumbered formats are the only option that can satisfy that requirement.

I also rip to and store FLAC since it gives me a perfect copy to transcode to any lossy format I need without losing quality due to multiple lossy encodings.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: AllanP on 2011-03-01 23:14:04
My whole music collection is encoded in Nero AAC 128 kbps ripped/converted from CD/Lossless audio files and I use it on both my computer and cellphone.

It sounds transparent (for me) in 95% of cases and when it is not transparent it is (for me) so close to the original so I do not care.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: 2tec on 2011-03-02 04:09:31
I myself, mostly rip to FLAC, however, as far as others go, very few people seem to even know what lossless audio is. Even if I didn't rip anything to mp3, I'd still have to deal with it, as there's still the rest of the world that seems bent on buying, or sharing, compressed songs. I wonder what will happen when storage constraints don't really apply?
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: B7k on 2011-03-02 08:02:05
I use flac for archival purposes and use aoTuV Beta5.7 ogg -q5 although I'm thinking of using the new aoTuV Beta6.02.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: SpiderJon on 2011-03-02 18:01:39
I wonder what will happen when storage constraints don't really apply?


Realistically they already don't - certainly in HDD terms. Portables are still somewhat restricted, although 32GB can hold a lot of lossless albums :-)

Up until now I've used FLAC for archival and stuff I felt 'deserved' it* and MP3 v0 for stuff I didn't think needed FLAC and/or which I wasn't worried about having archived. 

But now that I've upgraded my fileserver with a huge HDD I suspect things will mostly be FLAC from now on.

* hopelessly irrational, I know.  But human psychology is a strange and wondrous thing.  Perhaps someone should look into the placebo effect in relation to audio encoding?  (eg, ABXing suggests I can't tell the difference between MP3 v0 and lossless, but I somehow feel some things are better if they're lossless).
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Zarggg on 2011-03-03 00:45:20
Perhaps someone should look into the placebo effect in relation to audio encoding?  (eg, ABXing suggests I can't tell the difference between MP3 v0 and lossless, but I somehow feel some things are better if they're lossless).

You just defined the placebo effect right there.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Light-Fire on 2011-03-03 02:47:57
1) I rip to ALAC for archiving purposes (1 file per track) using XLD + AccurateRip.

2) Convert from ALAC to ALAC using iTunes so I can stream them to my Roku Soundbridge using iTunes as a server (iTunes "doesn't like" to stream the XLD files). Then I delete the original XLD encoded ALAC.

3) Convert from ALAC to MP3 320 kbps using iTunes and use MP3 Gain with album gain to normalize at 92.0. iTunes will stream only files created by iTunes (that's why I don't use LAME). I use those files to burn MP3 CDs to play in 2 different car CD players and to, sometimes, transfer to an old Sony MP3/ATRAC player (they have to be CBR because of compatibility problems with the old players and I use 320 kbps because I am NOT using LAME and, sometimes, I transcode them on the fly to ATRAC into the Sony player, to squeeze some more music in it's 512 Mbyte memory).

4) I convert on the fly from ALAC and/or MP3 to AAC 128kbps into the iPod.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: SpiderJon on 2011-03-03 19:34:50
Perhaps someone should look into the placebo effect in relation to audio encoding?  (eg, ABXing suggests I can't tell the difference between MP3 v0 and lossless, but I somehow feel some things are better if they're lossless).

You just defined the placebo effect right there.

As I say, I know it's irrational.

But, like Niels Bohr reputedly said when someone  asked him if he really believed a horseshoe above his door brought him luck - "Of course not ... but I am told it works even if you don't believe in it." :-)
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Zarggg on 2011-03-04 19:10:36
What exactly are you going for then, when you say "look into the placebo effect?" This forum is primarily concerned with demonstrable differences in perception, rather than subjective differences ("it sounds different/the same because I think it should") such as those from the placebo effect.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: SpiderJon on 2011-03-04 23:50:42
What exactly are you going for then, when you say "look into the placebo effect?" This forum is primarily concerned with demonstrable differences in perception, rather than subjective differences ("it sounds different/the same because I think it should") such as those from the placebo effect.


My apologies - it was an attempt at humour that obviously didn't work.

(Although you're mistaken if you think the placebo effect isn't demonstrable or 'objective' - eg, people get just as cured from placebos as they do from actual medicine.  But that's a whole other discussion :-)
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Diow on 2011-03-05 01:53:35
On the PC I use an Sony MDR-V900HD phone to hear the music, preferencially lossless.
After years using Monkey's Audio Extra High with one file per album + cue switch to FLAC with one file per track.
With MP3, -V4 on the mobile phone and -V2 on the car.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Agent69 on 2011-03-05 03:59:22
For me, it is Exact Audio Copy for extraction, FLAC for lossless encoding, and Foobar2000 for listening. I use a Powershell script to convert my FLACs into MP3 format for my iPod and Netbook.

I use one file per track and I refuse to give a damn about cover art.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Louck on 2011-03-05 15:03:40
I'll switch to lossless when it replaces mp3 in popularity. I cannot ABX LAME -v2 even on killer samples from this forum. But I do have part of my library in flac. I rip to lossless only absolute top tracks that I've been listening to for many years, though I can't really ABX them from mp3 versions.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: antman on 2011-03-13 03:43:36
MP3, FLAC, Per Track.

I used to play with encoders a lot but it just doesn't interest me anymore.  At most I'll change MP3 settings and that's it.  Open up the 2012 poll so I can go ahead and vote in it too. 
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: skexu on 2011-03-16 21:05:00
Personally: Ripping to wavpack hybrid -b440, one file per track, but since OptimFrog 4.910b came, I consider moving. It finally has foobar2000 1.x plugin, it has hybrid mode which I used in WavPack, and it's always the "lol10megssaved" factor  (Encoding speed doesn't matter.)

In the other thread I said I use aac and rarely mp3, here voted aac. But I always convert from lossless. I don't like handling CD's because my dvd drive has problems with itself 
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: Dakeryas on 2011-03-20 18:41:30
Lossy : for both my Cowon J3 and my computer: Nero AAC 1.5.4 at q.65 (~240 - 265kbps).

Lossless: for archiving (one file per track copied to my external hard drive): Monkey's Audio v3.99 (4.06 for the whole bundle) Extra High which is not that slow to encode with an i7  .


Why not Insane?



Well I did that at first, but there is a noticeable time gap between some tracks during playback (files' length is not any different from Extra High) on foobar2000, because it apparently takes too much out of the CPU to load the file. (Or because Windows doesn't give foobar2000 enough attention, I don't know.)

Even though I don't usually play my lossless files (I transfer most of them to my external hard drive), in case I have to, I don't like to face that time gap, all the more so as there's not much size difference between Insane and Extra High.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: insane_alien on 2011-03-20 19:30:45
FLAC -8 for storage (the longer encoding time makes not an ounce of difference considering how rarely i encode)

and vorbis 128kbit/s for lossy so a decent amount will fit on my mp3 player (cowon S9)

i have a small selection of 96kbps mp3's for ringtones as well but theres only about 30 tracks compared to some 5000 flacs and oggs.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: String Theory on 2011-04-30 22:04:20
FLAC for lossless archiving, Ogg Vorbis (latest aoTuv) @ 160 kbps (Q5) for everything else. My library also contains some MP3 and AAC-songs, but they are making their way into history.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: String Theory on 2011-05-04 07:33:47
Correction... now I completely switched back to a Apple-setup I choose the following:

- Archiving: Apple Lossless
- Everyhting else: AAC True VBR Q127

I know that in almost every case the AAC-setting is huge overkill, but most of my gear doesn't play lossless and I want the next best thing.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: lowerstreet on 2011-08-24 22:32:06
mp3 v0 or CBR 256 for general listening (eg. putting onto my mp3 player).  Then I keep a WAV backup.
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: digitalstorm on 2011-09-22 11:05:32
I didn't expect single track structures to be that wide spread  ...
I once used to do it like that, as well, but I settled to album structures with one file
per album, as it better reflects my way of dealing with music and additionally
looks more simple and clean organized... you know, not with that many files...
I always felt like a chaot to click, and click, and click, til you finally find the
desired songs; the album structure reduces the folder structure depth and thus
number of clicks  ...
Title: 2011 ripping/encoding general poll
Post by: ojdo on 2011-09-22 13:52:28
number of clicks  ...

That's why HE? gave us 10 fingers and a keyboard! 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020