[vorbis] Is Vorbis really THIS good?

Moritz Grimm gtgbr at gmx.net
Fri Oct 12 01:09:03 PDT 2001

safemode wrote:
> Also, I do notice a difference from oggs encoded at lower bitrates (such as
> 128) compared to vbr's made by lame (which in this example happen to be 180).
> They have more bass and less high frequency than they should and it's
> noticeable when playing against the original wave.
> lame thought it necessary to have a bitrate that high to sound most like the
> original yet still saving tons of space.  oggenc thought it necessary to only
> encode it at 126KB/s.  no matter what setting i tell it that it can go up to.
> Perhaps a -h argument is needed to override the strict space saver biased
> encoding in favor of a more realistic sounding file.

Well, now this sound like you're using current CVS that still is limited
to 128kbps ... ? All those options you want to alter are hardcoded,
because afair there's some optimization voodoo going on right now.


--- >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.

More information about the Vorbis mailing list