[vorbis] Vorbis native Ripper-decoder-encoder

[dbbry at yahoo.com]

At 09:03 PM 8/4/01 +0200, you wrote:
>On 2001.08.04 20:23:25 +0200 Craig Dickson wrote:
>> ndrw mchl grnbrg wrote:
>> For someone with less-critical ears and storage limitations, if an MP3
>> file is too big and the original, non-encoded source is not available,
>> re-encoding it to a lower-bitrate MP3 is probably preferable to
>> transcoding to Vorbis, 
>
>Why is that? How's MP3 better in this area?

I think that reencoding to a lower-bitrate MP3 will not lose as much of the remaining signal as transcoding to a different file format, because 96Kbps MP3 is more closely related to 128Kbps MP3 than is Ogg at any bitrate. Therefore, while 96Kbps MP3 encoding cuts out what the 128Kbps encoding does, plus a little more, an Ogg encoder finds an entirely different part of (what signal's left) to lose, resulting in a greater overall loss.

In a similar way, Ogg may waste many bits attempting to accurately encode MP3's artifacts; a second MP3 encoder would likely allocate fewer bits to these artifacts (after all, they weren't considered important by the first encoder).

Of course, I could be wrong.

--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.