Skip to main content
Topic: Opus 1.3-rc2 (Read 4609 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #50
No cover. It's a HDtracks download.

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #51
To discussion about resampler.
Even if quality doesn't matter, SoX is able to provide the same quality as Speex while being much faster. Isn't it?
Yes, but Speex resampler is nothing compared to the encoder itself. You'll be shaving fractions of a percent off the total encoding time.

And don’t forget about the more restrictive license on that resampler.

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #52
I guess opus, being a low delay codec,  will never choose libsoxr officially because of it's much longer delay.
However, from a user point of view, delay doesn't matter when you convert to a file using fb2k for example, and nothing can stop you from using sox resampler plugin.

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #53
And don’t forget about the more restrictive license on that resampler.
In this case it is worth to ask SoX authors if they allow to use their resampler with more permissive licence. Probably, they would not be against it =)

I guess opus, being a low delay codec,  will never choose libsoxr officially because of it's much longer delay.
It is always possible to add a new option (e.g. --soxresampler) to satisfy everybody.

Personally, I don't think that it is a required thing. But as far as I remember, people complain about the resampler for years, and probably it is worth to include the resampler just to reduce amount of the negative noise from these complains according to Opus. Less complains, more people who are indecisive now (and too lazy to investigate if these complains are really reasonable) will choose Opus as their next lossy codec =)

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #54
Opus Tools are provided under a two clause BSD license, while libsoxr is provided under the LGPL. The resampler would need to be supplied with binaries as a DLL module, with a clearly defined API, with clear instructions with how to compile your own replacement. All so a handful of you can enjoy the added Placebo and negligible performance difference. But I suppose until someone here does the hard work of implementing it for you, you won't be satisfied that you have benchmarked it and Proven that it is Way Faster, and therefore Measurably Better. I think I'll stop responding to this topic now, nobody cares anyway.

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #55
Speex resampler is nothing compared to the encoder itself. You'll be shaving fractions of a percent off the total encoding time.
Core i3 3245, HDD WD Green, Encoding FLAC 44.1/16 from RAM-disc to opus on HDD with fb2k, opus 32bit build from NetRanger's post (https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php/topic,116618.msg963060.html#msg963060)
Direct encoding to opus: ~45x
Pre-resampling with SoX plugin (0.8.4) (Passband 95%, Normal quality, No aliasing) and encoding: ~65x
So, no, this is not "fractions of a percent".

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #56
Whoa I never benchmarked sox+opus vs using opus directly. I had no idea it was faster.

I'm quite disappointed that no one informed me of my obvious misconception, since I kept going on and on about how I'd be wasting a bit of time by going with the sox method.

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #57
I think you guys should really consider painting the side of your resampler with a green marker. Makes a huge difference in quality!

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #58
Okay. So maybe a few seconds worth of encoding time difference. For a two minute input sample, that's a difference of 0.8 seconds.

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #59
So, if you encode a 100Gb set of FLAC files for your smartphone, it would save significant amount of time.

 

Re: Opus 1.3-rc2

Reply #60
Yes, it would make a difference of 2 whole hours on something you'll probably do once in your lifetime. That probably balances the two plus hours it would take someone to actually code this into the native application for you.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018