Topic: Music encoding (Read 3434 times)

GRAYDOG · « **on:** February 04, 2004, 07:04:58 pm »

What is the most used format in your library and why ?

Charlemagne 8 · « **Reply #1 on:** February 04, 2004, 07:11:58 pm »

Ape is by far preferable but takes up a lot of disk space. Even with 4 hard drives, I am crowded. MP3 VBR extreme is a reasonable compromise between quality and space.
I still have a lot of APE files of tracks that must be as high quality as possible.

CVIII

dkan24 · « **Reply #2 on:** February 05, 2004, 01:52:08 am »

Even though I use ape and mp3 (dual libraries), I think FLAC should be added to this list. FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Codec) is starting to make inroads with CE manufacturers, who are adding it to their media extender devices and portables. I am keeping my eye on this format since I may have to change my files over at some point.

J River- have you guys tried getting ape onto any CE devices? I know FLAC is free for them to add, so it may be hard to license ape. As much as I love ape, lossless being lossless, I will eventually have to switch over to FLAC when I get a CE device that supports it, be it extender or portable.

Drowbe · « **Reply #3 on:** February 05, 2004, 03:17:23 am »

Where is MPC in the list?

Cmagic · « **Reply #4 on:** February 05, 2004, 02:37:06 pm »

Using MPC most of the time over here ....

JimH · « **Reply #5 on:** February 05, 2004, 07:45:13 pm »

Drowbe,

Nice one.

Jim

JimH · « **Reply #6 on:** February 05, 2004, 07:46:43 pm »

I'm curious how many of the people who use MP3 or another codec have tried APE or another lossless codec.

KingSparta · « **Reply #7 on:** February 05, 2004, 07:56:40 pm »

Quote from: JimH on February 05, 2004, 07:46:43 pm

I'm curious how many of the people who use MP3 or another codec have tried APE or another lossless codec.

Me (1)

But it is better for me to just use mp3

I just can't hear a dif if i have the MP3's encoded at High quality.

rocketsauce · « **Reply #8 on:** February 05, 2004, 08:29:17 pm »

I have a lot of MP3s in my library, but they are either from (legal) downloads or music a friend shares with me. I encode my own cds with MPC. I would probably use APE or FLAC if I had the hardrive space, even though I probably can't hear the difference between a high bitrate MPC or MP3 and the original.

Rob

LonWar · « **Reply #9 on:** February 05, 2004, 09:25:57 pm »

I'm still flipping between ape and wma9 lossless..

I use wma for my handheld... Smaller size and better sound.

GRAYDOG · « **Reply #10 on:** February 06, 2004, 05:20:07 pm »

What is mpc ? And what is the file size ?

GRAYDOG · « **Reply #11 on:** February 06, 2004, 06:00:39 pm »

I have been ReRipping MY library and have been using mp3 at a 320 br and for those Favorites I have been using ape. I will NOT use wma for anything anymore

kcjack · « **Reply #12 on:** February 06, 2004, 07:42:38 pm »

I personally wonder why I have used Ogg Vorbis since it seems no one else has. I use it at a high bit rate on my pc and use a lower bitrate when transferring to my handheld.

The sound seems good to my ear. I seem to hear a loss in high frequencies using mp3 or wma. What is the advantage of APE or mp3 vbr over ogg vorbis.

KingSparta · « **Reply #13 on:** February 06, 2004, 07:59:45 pm »

APE = Lossless, it has the same quality as a Wave file without the huge size (not that APE Is Small)

MP3 VBR High is just like Ogg since Ogg is VBR, it is open source so there is no license agreement or fee to use it.

Ogg is however not supported very much so it is not the best choice (I feel).

MPC has better quality but is really not supported.

>> I seem to hear a loss in high frequencies using mp3 or wma.
it depends on the encoder really Lame does not drop out like others may (like real and musicmatch use).

windows media 9 has a lossless format in the new media player and also has higher bit rates that has better quality than Ogg and MP3 and media center 9\10 supports it.

Nolonemo · « **Reply #14 on:** February 06, 2004, 08:34:30 pm »

Graydog, if you're encoding to mp3, 320 CRB is probably just eating up space. Check here for extended discussions on mp3 encoding:

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?showforum=15&

GRAYDOG · « **Reply #15 on:** February 07, 2004, 12:19:14 pm »

King, wma file size is smaller and to me sounds a little better but I do not like the license issues even if your just moving stuff in your own new computer and have already had a few machines there is going to be issues

urlwolf · « **Reply #16 on:** February 07, 2004, 12:37:37 pm »

I use ogg.

In a codec, there is no reason NOT to use an open source alternative. If you are talking about a big application (office, photoshop), then it is normally de case that Open source alternatives are a little bit behind in usability and stability (not necesarily). BUt a codec?

And oggs sound great! plus I have a Karma that can play them, so no problems with compatibility.

I use them because it is the best way we can stop the lock-in from propietary stuff. The more people use them, the harder it'll be for a company to monopolize the market. Even with a market share of only a few %, ogg is playing a significant role. The fact that several manufacturers of handhelds are supporting them is interesting (iriver, rio, neuros...).

I only have two gatgets (rio karma, and nokia 3650). Both can play ogg. I don't see why people should be scared of coding their collections in ogg.

KingSparta · « **Reply #17 on:** February 07, 2004, 12:56:03 pm »

Quote

King, wma file size is smaller

Depends on the bit rate

GRAYDOG · « **Reply #18 on:** February 07, 2004, 01:07:11 pm »

King, I have a Karma as well and a Rio s35s . The s35s only works with mp3 or wma's .That is why I was trying to stay with mp3's. Do mp3 files have any license issues or is it a license free?

KingSparta · « **Reply #19 on:** February 07, 2004, 01:19:41 pm »

Quote

Do mp3 files have any license issues or is it a license free?

Most formats need to be licensed.

GRAYDOG · « **Reply #20 on:** February 09, 2004, 05:36:01 am »

It look's like mp3 is still the one

kiwi · « **Reply #21 on:** February 09, 2004, 08:39:51 am »

I use APE. My time is worth a considerable amount to me, so I don't ever want to have to rip my CDs again, and $99 for a 200GB drive is well worth it. (That's what, 600 CDs.) Get a second drive to mirror the content and then remove that drive from the system for backup protection.

Then all I do is rip rip rip...

I also use MP3s, I perform a batch conversion of my entire library periodically, this lets me use the MP3s on my iPod and plop them into DVD players when I'm having parties and can't connect the computer up to the stereo... when I do this, I usually lower the bit rates for the MP3s, since it's usually not noticable in the car or when I'm working out, and the extended battery life and available songs are definitely a plus. I just wish that MC could handle multiple formats for one song. (this would be an awesome feature... but might make things a bit too complex... the other thing that would be great would be multiple images attached to one song, for front/back/inside of CDs)

kiwi

Quisp · « **Reply #22 on:** February 09, 2004, 08:44:22 am »

I rip to APE, but only because it is supported by MC, otherwise I'd use FLAC since it is more compatible. Once in a lossless compressed form, I can go to anything I want, depending on the use. MP3 VBR using Lame --alt preset fast standard works great for most applications.

I've been looking into using Streamjack for streaming my music to any computer, however, there are too many issues with their interface that they'd have to solve before I could really use them. If they figure out that a track number can be used for sorting, then I'd use .wma since it provides superior quality at really low bit rates (compared to mp3).

INTERACT FORUM

Poll

What is the most used encoding in Your Library ?

Author Topic: Music encoding (Read 3434 times)

Drowbe