PDA

View Full Version : mp3 or ogg



mouseboyx
December 3rd, 2007, 04:43 AM
can you tell the difference between these files
http://mouseboyx.ath.cx/samesong.mp3 64kb/s mp3 lager file size
http://mouseboyx.ath.cx/syntheruption.ogg lowest quality ogg smaller file size

Vadi
December 3rd, 2007, 04:47 AM
I can't :|

Edit: the ogg seems to be twice as small too. Nice.

Kingsley
December 3rd, 2007, 04:49 AM
The mp3 sounds better, especially when that really loud part begins.

sloggerkhan
December 3rd, 2007, 04:52 AM
Slightly better from the mp3, but it was very close.

Rhubarb
December 3rd, 2007, 04:53 AM
They sound much the same to me.
Only problem is that the sample rate is 22kHz, which doesn't bring out the clarity and high frequencies people come to expect for CD quality music.

Lostincyberspace
December 3rd, 2007, 05:00 AM
can you tell the difference between these files
http://mouseboyx.ath.cx/samesong.mp3 64kb/s mp3 lager file size
http://mouseboyx.ath.cx/syntheruption.ogg lowest quality ogg smaller file size

some one should do a high Quality Ogg to flac comparison. I think ogg would be just as good but take less space.

SunnyRabbiera
December 3rd, 2007, 05:26 AM
well these days MP3 is starting to become a little nicer to open source thanks to the formats owners beginning to allow open source variations of the format out there.

Rhubarb
December 3rd, 2007, 05:28 AM
some one should do a high Quality Ogg to flac comparison. I think ogg would be just as good but take less space.
While ogg can sound transparent at 160kbps, it's still no substitute for FLAC.

The reason: If you use dolby prologic or make up your own surround hardware (a simple way would be to make the rear channel the difference of the left and right channels), you might be able to perceive some washy sounds from the rear channel.

FLAC because it's lossless is a good base to start at if you listen to high quality music on your PC, but want to listen to good quality on your mp3 / vorbis player / ipod by transcoding it to a lossy format.

Transcoding from a lossy format to another lossy format (eg from ogg to mp3) creates even more lossyness than from converting lossless to lossy (eg from flac to mp3).

Lostincyberspace
December 3rd, 2007, 05:36 AM
some one should do a high Quality Ogg to flac comparison. I think ogg would be just as good but take less space.

I just tried and I can't tell. then again my headphones are going out and are really cheap but they have been good for two years.

Arathorn
December 3rd, 2007, 11:10 AM
can you tell the difference between these files
http://mouseboyx.ath.cx/samesong.mp3 64kb/s mp3 lager file size
http://mouseboyx.ath.cx/syntheruption.ogg lowest quality ogg smaller file size
Did you do this manually or did you use a program for ABX (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ABX_test) (like Amarok (http://www.kde-apps.org/content/show.php?content=21358))?

n3tfury
December 3rd, 2007, 11:30 AM
can you tell the difference between these files
http://mouseboyx.ath.cx/samesong.mp3 64kb/s mp3 lager file size
http://mouseboyx.ath.cx/syntheruption.ogg lowest quality ogg smaller file size

the .mp3 sounds slightly better to my ears through both my PC>headphones and Home Theater/2 Ch. setup.

what programs were used to create these two files and the switches for each? what was used to rip the source?

tom-ubuntu
December 3rd, 2007, 12:43 PM
I started archiving everything in MP3.

Why? Because this is the format every device can play. Easy. Even if I would prefer a open format, I can't use it on everything I want.

Still got a huge FLAC collection, but this is stored on a external disk waiting for the devices to be ready for this format.

mouseboyx
December 3rd, 2007, 02:23 PM
The mp3 was ripped/converted from an flv file from youtube and the ogg was made from the mp3. so the ogg could not be better than the mp3.

I used the oggconvert from the repositories and ffmpeg.

n3tfury
December 3rd, 2007, 02:29 PM
The mp3 was ripped/converted from an flv file from youtube and the ogg was made from the mp3. so the ogg could not be better than the mp3.

I used the oggconvert from the repositories and ffmpeg.

how about a proper test ripping from uncompressed source>mp3 and then from uncompressed source>.ogg. transcoding is rubbish either way you slice it.

Polygon
December 3rd, 2007, 02:43 PM
so....it went from pretty bad to worse from the youtube to mp3 conversion, and then worse to even worse from the mp3 to the ogg.....we need a proper test xD

n3tfury
December 3rd, 2007, 02:47 PM
so....it went from pretty bad to worse from the youtube to mp3 conversion, and then worse to even worse from the mp3 to the ogg.....we need a proper test xD

exactly - it puts the .ogg file at a disadvantage from the start.

regomodo
December 3rd, 2007, 02:53 PM
mp3 has a slight edge, usually when in the sudden transitions between silence to sound

n3tfury
December 4th, 2007, 12:40 AM
OP - are you working on that proper test?

happysmileman
December 4th, 2007, 01:03 AM
Also the tests should be done at equal quality first, preferably 128kbps or 160kbps, since I think this is about when those two formats are most efficient.

toupeiro
December 4th, 2007, 01:48 AM
ogg compression sopposedly loses less in conversion and in that right is a superior format to mp3. I've never spent much time comparing the two. I use mp3 because it works everywhere, but the more DRM enfused this world gets, I may eventually ditch it.

your playback quality is only going to be as good as your audio hardware. Not being able to tell the difference, or a meaningful difference, on some headphones or PC speakers is expected. It is noticeable on good home stereo equipment.

I have a Klipsche 5.1 Home Theater series speaker system at home with the 12" sub and a Technics Direct Drive turntable with a grado needle. If I put on my Frances the Mute LP by Mars Volta, and compare it to an MP3 copy of the same album through my receiver and speaker system, yes I can tell a difference.

n3tfury
December 4th, 2007, 02:28 AM
ogg compression sopposedly loses less in conversion and in that right is a superior format to mp3.

key word "supposedly". also, it doesn't mean anything until blind or double blind tests.