Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: is vorbis DEAD or NOT (Read 44924 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #225 –
Quote
To my understanding you can download iTunes binaries and encode AAC, totally for free and legally.. So don't generalize and say that downloading AAC binaries is illegal..  It's not the case everytime. With few bucks you have access to many other AAC binaries also.

iTunes and Winamp's AAC were licensed from Dolby.  But that encoder isn't open source like FAAC, correct?  So releasing a binary based on source code written by an OSS group is forbidden but is ok only if you've paid your dues?

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #226 –
Quote
Quote
To my understanding you can download iTunes binaries and encode AAC, totally for free and legally.. So don't generalize and say that downloading AAC binaries is illegal..  It's not the case everytime. With few bucks you have access to many other AAC binaries also.

iTunes and Winamp's AAC were licensed from Dolby.  But that encoder isn't open source like FAAC, correct?  So releasing a binary based on source code written by an OSS group is forbidden but is ok only if you've paid your dues? 

Nevertheless, you have access to free and legal AAC binary. And, even better quality than FAAC. Depending on the country, it is also totally legal to download and use FAAC binaries.
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #227 –
Quote
Quote
Quote
To my understanding you can download iTunes binaries and encode AAC, totally for free and legally.. So don't generalize and say that downloading AAC binaries is illegal..  It's not the case everytime. With few bucks you have access to many other AAC binaries also.

iTunes and Winamp's AAC were licensed from Dolby.  But that encoder isn't open source like FAAC, correct?  So releasing a binary based on source code written by an OSS group is forbidden but is ok only if you've paid your dues? 

Nevertheless, you have access to free and legal AAC binary. And, even better quality than FAAC..

True, but only if you are a Windows user or Mac OS X user.  But have some pity for us Linux users, please

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #228 –
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
To my understanding you can download iTunes binaries and encode AAC, totally for free and legally.. So don't generalize and say that downloading AAC binaries is illegal..  It's not the case everytime. With few bucks you have access to many other AAC binaries also.

iTunes and Winamp's AAC were licensed from Dolby.  But that encoder isn't open source like FAAC, correct?  So releasing a binary based on source code written by an OSS group is forbidden but is ok only if you've paid your dues? 

Nevertheless, you have access to free and legal AAC binary. And, even better quality than FAAC..

True, but only if you are a Windows user or Mac OS X user.  But have some pity for us Linux users, please 

Use VMware 
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #229 –
Well.. as in discussions like this, arguing opinions get often put at its crudest.
My opinion still is (like I have said at least once already in this thread), that it's great that there's a free and good option like Vorbis.
But it is not without quite many deficiencies, and it doesn't help that there's not much lifesigns about the current development available.
I must agree that at least when Emmett was still in Xiph, there was much more fuss going on everywhere and information actually got out to the public. Now things are very quiet... We are practically here just speculating "alone" without any information link to Xiph. I don't see Monty's posts even on Vorbis mailing lists anymore. The last Ogg Traffic over 2 months ago said that Monty has been using a lot of time working on some declipping filter for Postfish..
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #230 –
Quote
Quote
Discussing the legality of FAAC and/or LAME has nothing to do if someone uses it or not. And that's not hypocrisy. And it doesn't make LAME and/or FAAC more legal in most countries.

Doesn't necessarely make Vorbis any more legal than these either. The legality is yet to be decided...

diference is that you already have one company claiming that you must pay for AAC and MP3 licenses, while the "owner" of vorbis claims is free, and NOBODY has challenged them ...

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #231 –
Quote
Ogg encoders:  Xiph

there are also the garf, and QuantumKnot encoders, and i think 2 more ...

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #232 –
Quote
My opinion still is (like I have said at least once already in this thread), that it's great that there's a free and good option like Vorbis.

agree, that is why i would love to see LAME team start working on a Vorbis implemnetation, with QuantumKnot garf, et all joining ... we need Free world ... or we would all end up being DRMd  ... for example, i bought the Alberto Plaza's CD Feberro 14, wich uses CDS200 ... if it werent for dbpoweramp i wouldn't be listening to it, and i would have returned it to the record company ... and least, you end up buying a bootleg copy for 1 dollar ...

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #233 –
Quote
agree, that is why i would love to see LAME team start working on a Vorbis implemnetation, with QuantumKnot garf, et all joining ... we need Free world ... or we would all end up being DRMd

It was said previously that DRM are not consubstantial to AAC ot to WMA. And Vorbis as well as Linux aren't incompatible with DRM.
Wavpack Hybrid -c4hx6

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #234 –
Quote
Quote
Ogg encoders:  Xiph

there are also the garf, and QuantumKnot encoders, and i think 2 more ...

Well, I'd place GT and QK tweakings pretty much on the same level as lets say LAME alt-presets, rather than refer to those as different encoder brands.
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #235 –
Quote
agree, that is why i would love to see LAME team start working on a Vorbis implemnetation, with QuantumKnot garf, et all joining ... we need Free world ... or we would all end up being DRMd

We need a free world, or we all end up being DRMed? I don't know about you, but I've heard a saying: "there's no free lunches". It's impossible for the world to be free, people has to eat and work (and people must click the google ads here so that HA hosting costs get covered.  ).
I don't think Vorbis being free has anything to do with DRM compared to other formats. DRM depends on services, not formats.
Record labels and RIAA wouldn't allow Apple to replace AAC with Vorbis without DRM in Itunes service, even if Apple for some reason wanted to do that.
Correspondingly you won't see any forced DRM in FAAC or many other public AAC-encoders.
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #236 –
I'm going to post some remarks, sorry if they have already been addressed before, I'm accessing from expensive cybercoffes and could only read up to page 5 so far.

Quote
Considering now that there are some people around (who have very obvious reasons to be biased towards AAC) gloating that "AAC trashes Vorbis" in the latest rjamorim listening test which showed that AAC did win but not with a significant level of confidence.


I don't know who you saw gloating about my test proving "AAC trashes vorbis", but that's bullshit. And you are wrong, it didn't win, at all. All the modern codecs were tied, as clearly explained in the results page.

All I saw here was people claiming MPC won the test. And I replied quite bluntly to these posts, as usual.


Also, about AAC LC being worse than Vorbis at low bitrates: That's wrong, the correct affirmation would be "AAC encoder X is worse than Vorbis at low bitrates". The reason is that, so far, I only tested AAC LC implementations lacking lossy stereo coding (Intensity Stereo). It's a flaw in the implementation, not in the standard. The only way to fairly compare AAC LC at low bitrates and Vorbis (which uses lossy stereo) is waiting for an AAC encoder to implement IS.

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #237 –
Quote
We need a free world, or we all end up being DRMed? I don't know about you, but I've heard a saying: "there's no free lunches". It's impossible for the world to be free, people has to eat and work (and people must click the google ads here so that HA hosting costs get covered.   ).

... i mean we need a free alternative ... what if tomorrow the AAC owners decided that they would charge 50 dollars per encoder? i'm currently using LAME, cause my IMP350 still does not supports vorbis, but i love to have a "free" codec, same reaso as i love Linux ... if MS decides to go full DRM compliant, i can continue using Linux

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #238 –
Quote
I don't know who you saw gloating about my test proving "AAC trashes vorbis", but that's bullshit. And you are wrong, it didn't win, at all. All the modern codecs were tied, as clearly explained in the results page.

exactly, so 2(?) years old tech (vorbis) compares favorable with much newer tech (AAC) ... this means that we are at a point where with current techs, almost all the codecs should sound the same ... i think the key is on the problematic samples ... and allways a little more fine/tuning ...

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #239 –
Quote
music record compagnie already tryed to spoil the p2p network with fake & if they realize that spreading plain DRM protected .mp4 instead of .m4p will lower the spreading of illegal MP4 ...

That's idiotic. Why would they even bother to rip a song to MP4, DRM it and put it on P2P? Why release a fake that can be actually played if you manage to decrypt it?

Fakes are usually made of big dumps of useless data (say, a chunk of SWAP), with a fancy name and the appropiate extension, be it MP4, M4P, OGG, MP3...

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #240 –
Quote
Roberto offers legal FAAC binaries from his site in Brazil since the patents aren't valid there. He does have a shortage of Solaris and BeOS compiles, though

I'd gladly host them if someone provided builds :B

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #241 –
Quote
exactly, so 2(?) years old tech (vorbis) compares favorable with much newer tech (AAC)

I think you are confused here a bit. AAC-LC (which we were talking about in this case) or intensity stereo are not any new tech.
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #242 –
Quote
there are also the garf, and QuantumKnot encoders, and i think 2 more ...

These are just branches, it's like claiming Gogo is diferent from Lame and Blade is different from dist10.

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #243 –
Quote
... i mean we need a free alternative ... what if tomorrow the AAC owners decided that they would charge 50 dollars per encoder?

Not going to happen. First of all, the "AAC owners" is missleading. MPEG controls the format. The well defined patent pools consist of many big companies which have patents. The license fees of a patent pool is agreed in mutual understanding, and there's no chance that suddenly aac encoders were to be charged 50 dollars. Too many big players here for something crazy like that to happen, unlike in Microsoft's case. Or can you imagine that suddenly Apple should pay 50 bucks per downloaded iTunes??
Quote
i'm currently using LAME, cause my IMP350 still does not supports vorbis, but i love to have a "free" codec, same reaso as i love Linux ... if MS decides to go full DRM compliant, i can continue using Linux
I suppose you mean that you are afraid that MS is going to use DRM always, which might be a valid fear when only one company decides. But just being "DRM compliant" doesn't say anything. Vorbis is DRM compliant also: http://www.sidespace.com/products/oggs/
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #244 –
Quote
Quote
Why? Because I know that LAME and FAAC are illegal in my country. No one yet said the same about Vorbis.

Copying CD you don't have is something legal in your country?
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=158625

If the answer is no, I suppose that using lame or faac won't realy bother you 

My brother owns a legal copy of one of Fhg MP3 encoder. And what? He uses LAME. If there was no FREE LAME, he would buy it. And he is doing crime using LAME. But the cause of that crime is a desire to use good production. So what is wrong if there is a way of enjoying quality tool while not making crime? What is wrong if some people want to change this world a liitle bit? Yes, copying CDs is a crime in many countries. But this doesn't mean if a person does a crime once (when copies CDs) like the way it all goes want do crime in trough his all life. Man must have a choice!
IMHO
Ogg Vorbis for music and speech [q-2.0 - q6.0]
FLAC for recordings to be edited
Speex for speech

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #245 –
Quote
I think you are confused here a bit. AAC-LC (which we were talking about in this case) or intensity stereo are not any new tech.

sorry, i meant activelly developed vs Vorbis slow dev ...

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #246 –
Quote
Honestly, I'm bored. As someone vaguely audiophile, I don't care about licensing issues. My amp, my headphone, my CD, my future SACD, my hard-disk are full of patented technologies. I could afford another one with AAC or anything else. Vorbis is patent-free? Ok, nice thing. But I will use it only if quality is worth. And it's not the case. I'm not using encoders in order to support an open-source project, but because I want high quality music.

Guruboolez, do you think most people have your quality ears? I think <5% have comparable. Do you think most of them read HA.org? And if we speak about popularity of a codec, and if every man makes decision with your logic...
A man chosen from majority:
1. Can't hear any difference between Ogg Vorbis and AAC. The difference that exists is not even subtle for him. There is no difference at all for his ears.
2. He think about hardware support more than about 5-20% size gain with same quality
3. Many of them think more about how beautiful is pronounce of a codec name (I am not joking, and don't want to say Vorbis is better pronounced than AAC neither vice versa)
4. He pays more attention to advertized production but not to the best.
So my congratulations! You are not from majority! You are inordinary man!
Ogg Vorbis for music and speech [q-2.0 - q6.0]
FLAC for recordings to be edited
Speex for speech

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #247 –
Just my 2 cents here, but one aspect of Vorbis that I like is that it's a free stand-alone encoder (built-in ogg container doesn't hurt either).  This means that the encoder size is a total of about 300k.  This is crucial to me as an encoder, and it's something that AAC is lacking in.  I know this sounds rather trivial but that's where things are.

I'm fully aware of FAAC and PsyTel's offerings, but no one has done a formal listening test to compare them to OggEnc.  All I know is that 1) Quicktime soundly beat them both at 128kbps, 2) Quicktime was nominally better than Ogg Vorbis (not significantly) and 3) Nero's HE-AAC soundly beat Ogg Vorbis at 64kbps.

That's great, but iTunes/Quicktime is a PITA to use for non-CD sources and it's not really standalone, and Nero's encoder costs money and comes with.... Nero (and if you don't want Nero, then sucks to be you).

Am I saying that Vorbis hangs on the fact that it's a free stand-alone encoder? Yes, I am.  If FAAC is updated tomorrow with all the wonderful things that make AAC so much better than Ogg Vorbis, then I'd probably start advocating AAC.  It's a sad state of affairs, but that's where Vorbis stands.  The best open source general purpose stand-alone encoder.
 

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #248 –
I think 9 pages of this is enough for now, and everybody who wanted to say something has had the chance to say his/her opinion.
Thread closed.
Juha Laaksonheimo