DMusic.com | for indie musicians and fans | Free MP3 music downloads

Forums > The General Forum

ogg support

NeoFlash	Date: September 14, 2002 @ 1:31 PM http://www.chip.de/downloads_updates/downloads_updates_212610.html Yes I know it's not engish, just hit download. When you start it up, just right click and hit encoding options. It's all there, and it works well and takes up little space. If this format became as mainstream as mp3, we could have stuff that sounded like 128k mp3 or better at 78k, which would save lots of webspace, not to mention that at the lower bitrates like the 24k lo-fi standard now, it sounds alot better than it's mp3 counterpart. Hopefully rio, samsung, sony, creative labs, and other companies will start supporting ogg, it is a superior format. " id="18672">When will the big players like realone and musicmatch support ogg? All we have that is well known is winamp. Through many spectral analysis graphs of mp3s and oggs converted to wav, the mp3 was always about 40-50% behind the ogg. Ogg is a truly better format for music. To really notice the difference, make an mp3 and an ogg both at 48 k and test it. You'll hear the difference more that way. To make something that was just about cd quality, it's hard to tell since you cn't overlap the graphs and have the wav file and mp3 file showing at the same time, you need a 320k mp3 file for it to get real close to matching the wav. Ogg did this in the high 100s. I don't know why companies like rio and creative just overlook this great format. Go see for yourself, get the program here http://www.chip.de/downloads_updates/downloads_updates_212610.html Yes I know it's not engish, just hit download. When you start it up, just right click and hit encoding options. It's all there, and it works well and takes up little space. If this format became as mainstream as mp3, we could have stuff that sounded like 128k mp3 or better at 78k, which would save lots of webspace, not to mention that at the lower bitrates like the 24k lo-fi standard now, it sounds alot better than it's mp3 counterpart. Hopefully rio, samsung, sony, creative labs, and other companies will start supporting ogg, it is a superior format.
GrooveTonic	Date: September 14, 2002 @ 4:52 PM hmmm, i've never heard of it
NeoFlash	Date: September 14, 2002 @ 6:39 PM http://www.inf.ufpr.br/~rja00/ogg.html And look for oggdrop in the second list of mirror sites on this site. It is an encoder for ogg vorbis. You just start the program, and an icon, about 1 inch appears on the screen with a fish on it. You right click it, and hit encoding options. You select the quality and options you want, for archive I use 192k cbr, 48000 Khz. You than drag and drop the wav file into the icon with the fish on it, and it encodes it. " id="18698">That's because mp3 has copy protection. Some pay mp3 download sites use protection so you can't copy it or burn it to cd. You can't do this with ogg. That is only a small reason it is still in the dark. It is alot newer than mp3, and not enough people know about it. Look at here http://www.inf.ufpr.br/~rja00/ogg.html And look for oggdrop in the second list of mirror sites on this site. It is an encoder for ogg vorbis. You just start the program, and an icon, about 1 inch appears on the screen with a fish on it. You right click it, and hit encoding options. You select the quality and options you want, for archive I use 192k cbr, 48000 Khz. You than drag and drop the wav file into the icon with the fish on it, and it encodes it.
NeoFlash	Date: September 14, 2002 @ 6:43 PM Try it for yourself, at a low bitrate like 48k against mp3 at 48k, I guarantee you'll see a difference. We could have 78k hi-fi, and that would save tons of space. But mp3 is more well known and people don't have players for ogg. Winamp can play ogg vorbis. It's a great format. Microsoft can bitch and moan all they want about WMA, but it has wierd sound effects in the background, and knowing that Microsoft has put spyware in their service pack, needs a special program like purgeie and have it run in safe mode just to delete ALL OF MY COOKIES AND HISTORY, they'll be puttin lots fo spy stuff in WMA 9. Sorry if I sound like a commercial, but ogg really suprised me.
PetulaClark	Date: September 15, 2002 @ 12:16 AM That's an interesting point about copy-protection in mp3. I was going to start doing all my rips in ogg anyway - It's legitimately open source and all. Not much of a techie in this regard, so I all I can say is that WinAmp (and XMMS, when I figure out how to get to work) are plenty good for me. I like small memory footprints.
NeoFlash	Date: September 15, 2002 @ 12:48 AM Ogg is the best. I use musicmatch with error correction to make the wavs and oggdropxpd to make the oggs in 200k, but the program while superb is retarted and makes it about 6-8k lower than you put in. Still rules.
RyanS	Date: September 15, 2002 @ 2:48 AM Even though OGG sounds great at lower bitrates compared to MP3, using it is a bad idea at the current time. OGG support is getting better, though. Winamp, XMMS, Sonique, and other players can now play it, there isn't much editors that can. Goldwave can, but Cool Edit cannot by default. Plus most hardware players do not support OGG, either. So, say if this site switches to OGG, users would have to convert the files to MP3 to be used in their hardware players. And I'll be damned if I'm gonna buy a new player (and I'm sure most people would agree)
RyanS	Date: September 15, 2002 @ 2:50 AM Plus, does Nero, or Roxio support OGG? I don't think they do...
NeoFlash	Date: September 15, 2002 @ 10:55 AM That's what I posted this here for, if more people try ogg, they'll like it more, and the more people that are educated to it, and the more that want it, the more change happens. And I wouldn't buy a new player, I agree with you. Any player that has upgradeable firmware could support ogg, like the riovolt sp250(thanks for recommending it tim, it RULES!) they could just make a firmware update for it. As for making the cd, roxio basic doesn't even support mp3s, but to make them al you have to do is make a data cd and drag your mp3s, oggs, or even gulp wmas there.
wallyadimeck	Date: September 15, 2002 @ 11:09 AM better.You can save a a fairly low quality, and end up with a decently small file size,-- but here's the REAL plus... you don't just have a song, but a VIDEO CLIP! I tell you know, it's the way of the future... :D www.DivX.com" id="18821">I don't know why we even waste time with further MUSIC-ONLY formats?? DivX is much better.You can save a a fairly low quality, and end up with a decently small file size,-- but here's the REAL plus... you don't just have a song, but a VIDEO CLIP! I tell you know, it's the way of the future... www.DivX.com
NeoFlash	Date: September 15, 2002 @ 11:57 AM I do love divx, but I want music that can goto a cd player and such, where video is not always needed, although I like divx. It's just that people on gnutella upload an average of 15 k on broadband, which is not enough to get a 700 mb movie. And many are spoofs, or were just camcorded in the movie theater. But I do have the matrix and deep blue see divx and they RULE!
ChillinBuzz	Date: September 16, 2002 @ 9:56 AM what, Easy CD Creator 5 basic doesnt change MP3s to WAV? Oh well, I'll stick to Winamp for the decoding then I've given OGG a try against a few of my MP3s at 128kbps. I listened to the computer speakers, then I took the MP3s and OGGs and decoded them back to WAV and burned an audio CD (you can really hear audio artefacts this way too ) and what a surprise, the OGG encoded tracks were quite a bit cleaner. Technology changes all the time, remember that new computer you once saw? more than 6 months old and it's a dinosaur! Also, can you imagine how long it would take to convert all the MP3s here to OGG and get all the artists here to eventually submit only in OGG. That'll take time....
NeoFlash	Date: September 16, 2002 @ 11:26 AM So, big whoop! Run the prog oggdropxpd, right click on it, and it has stuff for decoding to wav. And you can't convert mp3s to ogg, they'll sound worse, they both take out different things. I was just saying that more people should use it, and that if this becomes popular in the future, than maybe dmusic will use oggs and save some space.
NeoFlash	Date: September 16, 2002 @ 4:51 PM Hopefully soon people will find out for themselves that ogg is the best format, and companies will stop with the l0ser mp3 format.
RyanS	Date: September 17, 2002 @ 4:21 AM ugh... I give up
Cryxan	Date: September 17, 2002 @ 4:28 AM lol
PetulaClark	Date: September 20, 2002 @ 8:32 PM Some of my favorite files are old analogue rips to mp3's that were made circa 1996. I bet the records they came from are completely trashed by now. Also, the OGG encoder I use now is slooowwwwww compared to the mp3 encoder - it's gonna take a long long time just to re-rip everything to ogg. (Nobody has downloaded any of the oggs I've made available this week) And I totally forgot about how many mp3 players are out there already. Sorry everyone, I'd be mad if I shelled out $600 for a nice portable. Hm. We'll probably use feet-pound-miles for the next hundred years as well.
NeoFlash	Date: September 20, 2002 @ 8:38 PM Yes, even on my p4-m 1.8 GHz they are slow, but it takes more time to make a better file. What I tried to do is raise awareness for the format so people would tell companies that they want it as a format. I got 200 ogg uploads this week. I wanted people to use it, so I put popular stuff like eminem in ogg. I may not like it, but hey; it works, don't it?
PetulaClark	Date: September 20, 2002 @ 9:02 PM Yeah, better to encourage use of an open non-proprietary standard (that actually sounds better) even if it means some stuff doesn't get heard for a little while. (I don't think anything I have is that rare)
PetulaClark	Date: September 20, 2002 @ 9:03 PM But again, there is some old stuff on mp3 that I'll never get rid of.
TheWitchingHour	Date: September 24, 2002 @ 1:47 AM Well I look and hope for hardware based players to eventually support ogg..and I hope they do I like the format a lot but having mp3 ability is also needed right now.
NeoFlash	Date: September 24, 2002 @ 10:56 PM Yeah. But with these 20 and 40 gigabyte players out by creative and rio, why use ogg or mp3? Why not just put the wav on it, if it is that roomy?
forrix	Date: September 29, 2002 @ 1:55 AM well, when ya have 20gigs of mp3's...
NeoFlash	Date: September 29, 2002 @ 10:27 AM And if at any given time you need at least 20 gb of music to find what you want, ouch. Ogg vorbis is best used with oggdropxpd with the quality bar, now I know it uses vbr and some other stuff, but if a 1.6 mb file can sound like that (-1 quality) , it's enough to convince me. The only thing I hate is the encoders. They take time, and they take up a lot of my system resources, even on my p4-m 1.8 ghz. So I just drag all the stuff in, do web browsing or something else, and come back when it's finished. I originally liked that it is open source. It is free. How many mp3 encoders are trial and have ads? Almost everyone. Oggdropxpd has no crap. I put up with musicmatch since it has error correction and cddb to make the wavs, than encode them with oggdropxpd. No one pays royalties when making an ogg encoder. People can change anything they want about it.
losthadon	Date: September 30, 2002 @ 2:51 AM i agree...haha
icisnizz	Date: September 30, 2002 @ 3:52 AM It it just me or does neo sometimes talk in star track code or something...It must be sunday!
pog	Date: September 30, 2002 @ 8:57 AM If you are going to compare ogg vorbis and mp3 compressions, shouldn't you be using the same encoding package for the test, cos I dare say that the ogg encoder may have done more passes by default, which would produce a more accurate compression. Maybe they even do this because it's more lossy than mp3, and to compensate they do like 48 passes lol

Post A Reply
From:	Guest	(Icons - Linking)
Post: