[Vorbis-dev] Streams with block sizes 4096 and 8192

[KumarBraj Bhushan]

>If we did remove 8196 (and I'm not saying we would), we _certainly_
>wouldn't even consider removing 4096 - that's in wide use, and has
>been for some years. Removing it would break a lot of files that users
>are happily playing at the moment.

Mike you are probably right that 4096 block size is often used for low quality (q -1) cases. So we might need to keep it for some time. But 8192 can be, certainly, gotten rid off. If we maintain that future Encoders will not be using 8192 blocksize (as is the case with current Encoder!), this will have no compatibilty issue.

regards,
Kumar.



-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Smith [mailto:mlrsmith at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 11:11 AM
To: kiran.aral at wipro.com
Cc: vorbis-dev at xiph.org
Subject: Re: [Vorbis-dev] Streams with block sizes 4096 and 8192


On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:01:42 +0530, kiran.aral at wipro.com
<kiran.aral at wipro.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> As Kumar mentioned, Block size of 8192 would definitely increase memory
> requirements for decoder implementation. Thanks Kumar, for mentioning
> this in this forum. I also emphasize the low memory requirements and
> less complexity on the decoder side would increase Vorbis' presence in
> audio market especially in portable player market.
> 
> I also suggest Vorbis project to draft an amendment by removing 4096 and
> 8192 block sizes for Vorbis implementation on embedded platforms
> provided there are no definite advantages.

If we did remove 8196 (and I'm not saying we would), we _certainly_
wouldn't even consider removing 4096 - that's in wide use, and has
been for some years. Removing it would break a lot of files that users
are happily playing at the moment.

I don't think removing 8196 is really something we'd want to do either
- as a concession to limited-memory devices, the final format
specification (as finalised when we did the libvorbis 1.0 release)
removed several larger block sizes that had previously been permitted
(I think these were 16k, 32k, and 64k).

I don't think we want to retroactively change the vorbis format (for a
future "vorbis 2", we'd certainly be willing to consider any sort of
changes, though).

Mike
_______________________________________________
Vorbis-dev mailing list
Vorbis-dev at xiph.org
http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/vorbis-dev