[vorbis] Which encoder ver to use?

[Jonathan]

Petr Tomasek wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 02:27:59PM -0500, Jonathan wrote:
>> The Garf-tuned encoding is expected under almost all
>> circumstances to sound better than the plain 1.0 or
>> Post-1.0 CVS encoder versions.  Garf did specific tuning
>> on transient detection and coding, as well as better
>> attack detection... Also, on this note, Garf is planning
>> to (in the next update, as I understand) fix the quality
>> scale to roughly match the Xiph encoder.  And about
>> muddying the water, we all hope it's only a matter of
>> time until Garf's tunings are merged into the main CVS,
>> because as far as I know there have been no samples
>> which sounded worse with Garf's tunings, and it improves
>> quality on all samples I've ever tried ABXing. =)
>
> Huh, how can you compare, if the bitrate doesn't scale
> the same? :-o (Nothing against Garf, I appreciate his
> work...)

If you wanna compare bitrates, make two files with the two encoders,
adjusting the -q settings until you get comparable bitrates, then do a
listening test. =)  And again, the reason why the bitrate is increased at
certain quality settings is because the encoder better handles sharp attacks
and transients that the Xiph libraries might be improperly encoding or
failing to detect entirely.

-Jonathan

--- >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.