Skip to main content

Poll

What lossy formats do you use on a *regular* basis?

  • AAC or HE-AAC v1,v2 (.m4a, .aac…)
  • LossyWAV + lossless (.lossy.flac, .lossy.wv, .lossy.tak…)
  • MP3 (.mp3)
  • Musepack (.mpc)
  • Ogg Vorbis (.ogg)
  • Opus (.opus)
  • WavPack lossy (.wv)
  • AC3 Dolby Digital (AC-3, E-AC-3)
  • WMA Standard/Pro (.wma)
  • USAC (xHE-AAC)
  • Other lossy format

Topic: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs) (Read 11397 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
What lossy  formats do you use on a *regular* basis?

Previous 2015 format poll

  • sauvage78
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #1
I voted AAC even if I mainly use Opus 128Kbps on my Android phone (LG G5).

The reason I voted AAC over Opus is because I think Itunes AAC is the best codec to use with x264/x265 as it's MPEG.

The audio quality of both Opus & Itunes AAC is roughly equivalent to me, so my choice is not purely based on audio quality.

As of now, I have a backup of all my collection in Flac -4 & I only use lossy audio temporarily. Yet, I don't plan to use a 100% lossless backup for the rest of my life. At some point I know I will encode stuff that I don't listen to anymore.

The final decision for my lossy audio codec of choice is tied to both:
- the final efficiency of the so-called next gen video codec of the alliance for open media (VP10).
- the evolution of the licence pool of HEVC & how it affects the codec support by major multimedia players.

If Google's free video codec is crappy, then I will stick to Itunes AAC & stop using Opus despite the fact that it's my favorite lossy audio codec.

Technically, I think Opus is superior to any AAC codec due to the way it flawlessly deals with gaplessness. Yet, I fear this advantage alone will not be enough if Google's video codec is crappy. If I would consider audio only & not audio+video, I would likely choose Opus over AAC. So my actual choice is currently very paradoxical.

Note: I have used Vorbis & lossywav in the past, I stopped using them.
  • Last Edit: 05 August, 2016, 04:30:49 PM by sauvage78
Rip & Check: EAC Secure [Low/C2]+CUETools [AR Confidence 2+]
NAS (Backup): Flac -4 (for Speed) | CDImage+CUE with F2K
DAP (Playback): Opus 128Kbps | Tracks with F2KM on Android (LG G5)
Video: AV1 (2160p30@24Mbps-2Pass) Asap !!!

  • yourlord
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #2
It only lets you select one. I use Opus and Vorbis extensively.

Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #3
Lossywav high fixed-shaping for archiving albums from CD to disk. Ogg and Opus 9 times out 10 when uploading to internet or using on phones.

  • Soap
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #4
Only lets you pick one
Creature of habit.

Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #5
About time.

I was starting to wonder whether we were going to have it this year or not.
  • Last Edit: 05 August, 2016, 10:57:42 PM by includemeout
Listen to the music, not the media.

  • soundping
  • [*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #6
I'm really liking opus 1.1.3. It just feels good on my brain.  :)
I like bacon and .OPUS   :-)

  • vibee
  • [*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #7
Opus @ 96kbit/s for my mobile device. GoneMad Player on Android 6 supports it without any problem. I even transcode other lossy files with high bitrates to opus for this purpose and never encountered any audible issues.

  • visaton
  • [*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #8
I voted for Vorbis! Since November 2015 i'm using this format at q7 quality. At this quality I couldn't find any advantages to Opus over Vorbis. The file size isn't proper argument, because it depends of the music type. Sometimes Opus has smaller file size, sometimes Vorbis, but in general the difference is less than 1mb.

I use aoTuV's Vorbis!

  • KozmoNaut
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #9
MP3 is still my lossy format of choice, for compatibility with various devices that are either old and/or the makers couldn't be arsed to support other formats.

I'd love to go full-on Ogg Vorbis or Opus, but the device support just isn't there compared to the old stalwart MP3, warts and all.

  • Klimis
  • [*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #10
First post.

I voted for AAC even though it's technically tied with Opus.

What I like in both AAC and Opus is that even if their lower bitrate results may not (importantly) produce transparency, their artifacts are not something that my brain and ears will focus on, costing in the enjoyance of the media I am playing back.

Both AAC and Opus are really well optimized formats at pretty like any given bitrate.

I find myself wanting to make a switch to Opus but the last thing that keeps me off is that I have that "thing" that I like my audio to pass through as less layers of resampling as possible, so I don't want my redbook audio to be resampled to 48khz (at least not at a pre-DAC level). So unless this issue gets adressed in Opus I'm sticking with AAC that it has a way bigger adoption rate than Opus for the moment.

But with all those great lossy formats my question is, is there any room for improvement in both transparent-target and non-transparent targets?
Is there any discussion about any ideas or any tests?
  • Last Edit: 06 August, 2016, 08:29:39 AM by Klimis

  • 2012
  • [*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #11

The reason I voted AAC over Opus is because I think Itunes AAC is the best codec to use with x264/x265 as it's MPEG.

Why would AAC be better if your player supports Opus in MKV?
saldl: A lightweight well-featured CLI downloader optimized for speed and early preview.
https://saldl.github.io

  • sauvage78
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #12
AAC+AVC & AAC+HEVC are naturally made to fit in the MP4 container, that's how the MPEG norm intended it to be, so that's how hardware sellers intend to develop official support for it. Now, indeed you can crossbreed norms. Qualitywise this may even result in a better file as, if done correctly, you can select the best codecs of both worlds. Yet, the result is nothing but a monster in terms of hardware support just like Vorbis+Xvid in AVI was. Indeed Matroska drastically improved mixing codecs from different norms, yet on paper the result is still a monster. So it is not better in terms of playback, it is better in term of logic & on how people expect things to be. Some players may support Opus in MKV especially if based on linux/android, but the majority of hardware manufacturers will advertise for AAC+AVC/HEVC because this is how music/video is officially sold online. If you're mixing AVC+Opus in MKV you're going against the grain. You're free to do so, you may even take pleasure in this perceived freedom, but don't complain if the majority of others don't ... and I am not telling this is the way it should be (I love free codecs), I am just telling that after staring at the multimedia world for nearly 20 years, it is the way it is.

So call me a conservative or a conformist if you will, but I have given up the idea of mixing norm/license as I have learned from my past mistakes with vorbis. It's either Google(Video)+Xiph(Audio) brings us a better overall free multimedia solution than MPEG AND hardware providers support it, or their effort is pretty vain outside of the <audio> & <video> html tags & the streaming world (which is a great achievement in itself).

The way I see it, VP10/Opus/Matroska are great, no doubt, yet over the years MPEG seems unshakable as 95% of users don't realize the potential benefit of using them. I am convinced Opus is better than AAC, yet I am also convinced that this belief is not worth a dime if I am alone to think so. If Google VP10 fails & I end up using AAC Itunes+x265 for video, it is unlikely that I will continue to use Opus for audio. Sad but true.

Now you introduced Matroska, well I wouldn't mix Matroska with VP10/Opus vs. HEVC/AAC, because containers are on the lossless side for me, you can always remux MP4 to MKV & vice versa. Plus, Matroska has proven itself very efficient for subtitles.

So I would put Flac & Matroska aside as free solutions that can potentially enhance MPEG solutions, rather than frontal competitors like Opus/VP10. I kown it may sound illogical as you will argue that they compete with Alac & MP4. Yet, I don't have the feeling of going against the grain when using them because I can always go back. So, yes, this may be somewhat subjective in the end, but I think that using VP10/Opus has replacement for MPEG would be a complete paradigm shift & unless hell freezes over, no matter how strong I would like it to happen, it is unlikely to happen.

I may sound skeptical or pessimistic, but I prey for Google to succeed with VP10 as hope is what dies last.

So to answer your question:
"Why would AAC be better if your player supports Opus in MKV?"
Mainly because of FUD & herd behavior, this may sound irrational & stupid at first, but the consequences of FUD are real, that's for sure.
  • Last Edit: 06 August, 2016, 01:30:28 PM by sauvage78
Rip & Check: EAC Secure [Low/C2]+CUETools [AR Confidence 2+]
NAS (Backup): Flac -4 (for Speed) | CDImage+CUE with F2K
DAP (Playback): Opus 128Kbps | Tracks with F2KM on Android (LG G5)
Video: AV1 (2160p30@24Mbps-2Pass) Asap !!!

  • MWD1001
  • [*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #13
First post since the forum change (like a lot of members I lost my entire history dating back to 2003....whatever).  Ever since I migrated to Apple products a few years ago I migrated to AAC.  MP3 is no longer needed since I don't carry around any MP3 players anymore.  It's mostly AAC on my iPhone while in the car.  In fact when not in the car, I've actually gone back to listening to my actual CDs (I can sense a disturbance in the force from all the millennials out there after that comment) and rarely ever listen to my FLACs either.

Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #14
I picked AAC since the FHG encoder since its only one to my ears that sounds great to me at 192kbps with my experimental, noise, drone, ambient & metal collection. Opus would be a second for me but it very ridged VBR bit rate is kinda off putting since less demanding music still gets a bit rate of 160k if you picked 160kbps VBR.

  • Maurits
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #15
My preference hasn't changed for years now. AAC for all playback, FLAC for all backup.
There is a hidden message in the song at approximately 4:32. If played at half speed, Waters can be heard to say, "That was pretty avant-garde, wasn't it?"

  • eahm
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #16
You need to add "I don't use lossy codecs on regular basis" or "I no longer use lossy codecs" or "I only use lossless codecs" etc.

  • loft
  • [*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #17
I picked Vorbis as that is my codec of choice when copying FLAC to my Android phone. Otherwise I still have some mp3's and some mpc's. For a short while I had an iPhone so I was forced to use AAC.

  • Emanuel
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #18
First post in many, many years.
Ever since I switched to the Apple ecosystem, I went from aoTuV Vorbis (which I really enjoyed) to AAC. Also, I left FLAC in and simply use WAV when needed. Due to cheap storage space, FLAC is no longer necessary for local storage. For internet downloads, the story is different.

  • Swampfire
  • [*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #19
I just mounted my ~400 CDs on the wall next to my stereo. But I mostly listen in another room with my DAP and a pair of headphones. So I've been ripping to Apple Lossless, and converting to AAC256 for portable devices. But it's really getting to the point where you don't need to use lossy encoding with portables, if you buy most of your music. My collection fits easily onto a 200GB SDHC card, even in ALAC format. I have some of my friend's music, matched via iTunes to AAC256.

  • jaybeee
  • [*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #20
I only use MP3 (LAME of course) and AAC (M4A). I voted AAC as I can only choose one. It's about equal usage.

Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #21
I'm really enjoying LossyFLAC with Rockbox lately.
Allegari nihil et allegatum non probare, paria sunt.

  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #22
Only lets you pick one
Thanks to note it.
The new forum accepts only one choice per question in a poll.
Not sure if it's possible to change it.

  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #23
This is how 2015 ends

  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Re: 2016 Format Poll (lossy codecs)
Reply #24
You need to add "I don't use lossy codecs on regular basis" or "I no longer use lossy codecs" or "I only use lossless codecs" etc.
Well, this poll is just for lossy codecs. There is another poll for an information that  You mention https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,99496.0.html