Skip to main content
Topic: Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect (Read 4636 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

VQF is not all that new, but it is one of the big (?) (wannabee) alternatives to MP3, right?
Just like Vorbis, MPC, etc...

So please give VQF a section too.
Btw, pritty soon the new version of VQF should come out, it will do bitrates up to 192k, so that should improve it a lot.

There's a few nice VQF fan people hanging around #vqf on dalnet (+ a series of lamers)...
...and their site is www.dalnetvqf.com. Contact Nile (the guy behind the site), he'll be happy to moderate the section and/or make post about vqf stuff...

Please do this...

Bye

-Thor

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #1
There are a few problems I see with this.

One is that vqf development has pretty much slowed to a halt for awhile now.  There isn't really much to talk about in that regard.  Plus, the vqf up to 192kbps as far as I know has been constantly delayed, time and time again.  Not to rain on anyones parade, but at this point I think its not even absolutely certain if it will happen at all.  The last thing I saw from Nero said they were concentrating on other projects before they released vqf at 192kbps.

In addition to all that, I'm not sure there is much demand from the viewers for a forum for this format.  I can't really see adding it "just because".  Even the vqf "dedicated" forums themselves have been discussing other formats more than vqf itself lately.

So I'm not really sure it makes sense.  I'm listening though, and if someone can convince me otherwise, then we'll see.

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #2
Well, by give VQF a spot here you can only help I think.
It's true that VQF developers aren't really reachable, but a lot of fans and software makers are...

Nero has final sourse to the 195kb encoder, so it's only a matter of (short) time before they bring it out ...

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #3
Yeah, VQF has been dieing for a while now, but it still has its followers.  Maybe an "other" format section to get VQF and some of the other formatls like Monkey Audio and stuff

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #4
Quote
Originally posted by Sawg
Yeah, VQF has been dieing for a while now, but it still has its followers.  Maybe an "other" format section to get VQF and some of the other formatls like Monkey Audio and stuff


I also think a 'misc' forum would be a good idea, perhaps also a general 'chat' forum?

On the other hand, this can just as well go into the 'general' forum like it is right now...

Hmmm.

But then it wouldn't be under 'Psychoacoustic Audio Compression', where it actually belongs.

I dunno. I think the problem right now is that it isn't clear where a) VQF discussion and b) general chat should have to go. Perhaps this can be clarified?

--
GCP

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #5
Quote
Originally posted by Garf


I also think a 'misc' forum would be a good idea, perhaps also a general 'chat' forum?

On the other hand, this can just as well go into the 'general' forum like it is right now...

Hmmm.

But then it wouldn't be under 'Psychoacoustic Audio Compression', where it actually belongs.

I dunno. I think the problem right now is that it isn't clear where a) VQF discussion and b) general chat should have to go. Perhaps this can be clarified?

-- 
GCP


I'm still undecided about a misc or off topic discussion forum.  Originally I did have one when I designed the site, but I removed it.  I may possibly add it back though, we'll see.

I still don't think there is enough going for vqf to justify a separate forum section just for it though.  The other forums I have seen for it really don't have much discussion happening on them, they are turning instead to discussion of other formats, some major vqf sites are shutting down, there is no active development on the format (despite the fact that Nero may have vqf at 192kbps, until it is released, it doesn't mean much unfortunately), and quite frankly there are other alternatives out there which are superior.  Vorbis, AAC, and especially mp3PRO, sound better than vqf even at the lower bitrates vqf is targeted at.  Even at 192kbps I very seriously doubt vqf is going to be better than aac or mpc, or even vorbis, even if it can somehow compete with LAME vbr.

Sorry,  I'm just still not convinced.  I don't want to alienate anyone, but I also have to be realistic about how many forums I can put up on the site.  People are more than welcome to discuss the format in the "Project Mayhem Discussion" General forum if they want though.

Dibrom

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #6
If Nero do bring out VQF2++ (or whatever its called I cant remember) it could be a strong format....So if it takes off I would perhaps consider it I were you.

But then again Nero have been talking about doing this for ages and ages.So I dont think it will happen (even though I heard they paid $15000 for it (probably just a rumour))

So until then forget it, VQF at 80 & 96kbps was really good (for the bitrate obviously).But no real support, closed source it aint worth it (vqf.com/bbs hardly gets any posts right now so one at Hydro wouldn't get many either)

Cheers, Hope it helps,
-Nic

ps
I tried developing my own VQ Encoder from the MPEG-4 source (not compatible with normal VQF). Sounded ok at 160kbps (shouldnt everything ....But I didnt have the expertise to make it considerably better than the MPEG source....Shame.

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #7
idd vqf.com is dead,  but that's because they never update it ...
www.dalnetvqf.com DOES live ...

Quote
From www.dalnetvqf.com
About VQF.com - Posted Friday, September 21, 2001 12:09 AM by Jared 

The owner of VQF.COM is totally out of touch of the VQF format. He no longer researches nor cares about the format. This is why the site appears bare. Reguardless of what Joe is posting on VQF.COM, we at DALNetVQF will continue to provide you with the latest, cutting-edge software and information on NTT, Yamaha, Ahead, Winamp, and the VQF Format. We would like to give thanks to those developers working hard on software for this format and let all of you know that your hard work is NOT in vain. 
Ahead = the Nero company
Winamp = (in this case) PP (Peter Pawlowski) and me...
PP coded a great vqf plug-in for Winamp. I took care of packaging and distribution of it... (http://www.dalnetvqf.com/winampplugin/ )This really gave the vqf scene on dalnetvqf.com (and #vqf on Dalnet ) a boost since it was _a lot_ better then the crappy Winamp plug-ins for VQF available before...

Peter also made a Winamp VQF encoder plug-in, but that wasm ostly to stop naggers... 'cause it's not as good as other encoders...

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #8
[deleted]

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #9
Dont get me wrong im a big fan of VQF (its stiill the most pleasant to me at 80kbps) I just dont think there is that much to discuss. And on the point of VQF.COM/bbs being dead. That board has had so many messages (I remember back when peeps like Baddude_X,Adam,JohnV,etc used to post there all the time, it was such a hot forum. Now nothing & dalnetvqf.com has barely ever had any posts by the look of it.....

So I just dont think it would be worth effort (else more people would be usng dalnetvqf or otherwise)

But if theres enough interest I suppose.......

Cheers,
-Nic

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #10
But even then when vqf.com/bbs was a hot forum, there was very little VQF discussion. For me personally VQF has never given enough quality so that I could listen VQF-encoded music.
Juha Laaksonheimo

Before the real VQF freaks start nagging... give them a sect

Reply #11
Very true on all points John :-)

-Nic

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018