[vorbis] WMA9 versus OGG

[Tom Felker]

On Friday 27 February 2004 6:51 pm, Tom Page wrote:
> Hello all
>
> I have been encoding to OGG as a default for well over a year, but I
> recently thought I ought to test how it sounds compared to other codecs. I
> got the Windows Media 9 encoder and I was quite surprised at how bad a job
> OGG did at quality 0 with a simple piano clip, and how well WMA9 was - I've
> always considered WMA as being a bit naff, but WMA9 has forced me to
> re-access this view
>
> Drop by
>
> http://www.tompagenet.co.uk/vorbis/
>
> to see if you agree or can offer any insight - shouldn't OGG beat WMA9 in
> sound quality? The original is from the Lost in Translation sound track -
> please don't download it too much - I do have limited bandwidth!
>
> Thanks, Tom

Try this:

oggenc -q4 --resample 22050 AloneInKyotoClip.wav

The downsampling lets you encode at a higher quality (no artifacts) and 
maintain the same bitrate.  I wish oggenc automatically did things like this 
given a target bitrate, but oh well.  And there may be other tunings I don't 
know about.


-- 
Tom Felker, <tcfelker at mtco.com>
<http://vlevel.sourceforge.net> - Stop fiddling with the volume knob.

"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about 
Exchange Server next.
--- >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.