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 44928 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #200 –
Quote
Quote
But I can't understand others. Why do you want to go with closed (there is no good open competitor today) encoder knowing there is some risk to see the same what happens to MP3.

I'd like to see what happened to mp3 happening to aac: dominent audio format, with hundreds portable and DVD players supporting it. Terrific risk, isn't it?

1. You understood me wrong. I mean BAD QUALITY ENCODERS spreaded worldwide by His Majesty Creator of MP3.
2. And if to talk about hardware support - where is it for MP3Pro? Huh?
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 #201 –
Quote
But I can't understand others. Why do you want to go with closed (there is no good open competitor today) encoder knowing there is some risk to see the same what happens to MP3. IMHO in any case many of you, developers of LAME (by the way a thank you very much for LAME) sooner or later will start working on an open (high quality targeted) encoder. And this will not be a new standard. It would be either AAC due its lack (IMHO) of progress or you will decide (I hope) to develop Vorbis. But if this would ever happen why not to go directly with open codec right now.
IMHO

Because:
1. AAC is MPEG ISO open standard with good and open format specifications -> Vorbis is no industry standard, and it has no good specifications.
2. There are many competing implementations which guarantee that quality competition will keep up.
3. There's constant development going on in order to bring the best and latest technology in to the MPEG technology pool.
4. There is open sourced encoder and decoder. The decoder (FAAD2) is probably the best available decoder there is (commercial competitors included). FAAC is improving very nicely.
5. MPEG-4 AAC is the only real chance there is to compete against Windows Media dominance.
6. There is lots of interesting things happening in the MPEG world. The same can't be said about Vorbis at least currently.
7. MPEG-4 AAC development is going strong, there are new implementations appearing, and old get better all the time. The same can't be said about Vorbis.
8. MPEG-4 AAC offers top notch quality from very low to high, and development ensures that it will only keep getting better.
9. Well defined patent pool -> safer to implement for big industry than unclear Vorbis. Will mean more hardware support.
10. Development and future don't depend on one man, like with Vorbis.
11. Lots of other reasons, but these came to my mind at first.
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #202 –
Quote
1. You understood me wrong. I mean BAD QUALITY ENCODERS spreaded worldwide by His Majesty Creator of MP3.
2. And if to talk about hardware support - where is it for MP3Pro? Huh?

Sorry.
Yes, when many implementations of an encoder are existing, there's a risk to see a bad one being widely used. But I would add that poor modern AAC encoder (Winamp AAC, faac AAC) are not bad encoders at all, and are not comparable with Blade or Xing (old) awful quality.
Last but not least, if people are choosing a bad encoder and are happy with it, where's the problem? Maybe for filesharing 

2. MP3Pro is a proprietary and closed solution (and in one sense, a poor quality one). Not comparable to AAC. But even here there are some mp3pro jukebox.
Wavpack Hybrid -c4hx6

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #203 –
Quote
Edit: and once again - AAC is not closed, the standard is much more open IMO than Vorbis, because it is extremely well detailed document with hundreds of pages that average engineer could understand. There are also dozens of AES and other scientific articles on algorithms used in AAC/MP3 models, including performance/cost estimations, tips how to do it efficiently in hardware, etc...


The standard is open, but what about the encoders?  Can I go and download Dolby's AAC source code or Nero's HE-AAC source code or FhG's encoder source code and compile it for my linux box or solaris box?  As for FAAC, can I go and legally download an FAAC binary for my BeOS box, my Solaris box, etc?  That does not sound very open to me, compared with other open source projects like Linux or Mozilla where the source code is the complete source code and you can compile it wherever you like.  What good is it to obtain a book of MPEG standards when I can't even download suboptimal AAC encoder binaries without being in violation of some license? 

Despite whatever spin is put on the openness of the AAC standard only, it will never belong to the group of OSS projects.  Vorbis seems to fit the OSS criteria better here.  Not only do you get the documentation (which I'll admit is not very comprehensive for Vorbis), but also the source code of the main branch, not some volunteer-driven project by another party who are working, based on the standard (ie the only bits of publically-available information).

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #204 –
do the vorbis specs/licenses (or whatever) necessarily need the encoders to be open source?
I know, that I know nothing (Socrates)

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #205 –
Quote
do the vorbis specs/licenses (or whatever) necessarily need the encoders to be open source?

Interesting question.  I'm not sure.  Every file in the source code of Ogg and Vorbis has this comment header:

Code: [Select]
/********************************************************************
 *                                                                  *
 * THIS FILE IS PART OF THE OggVorbis SOFTWARE CODEC SOURCE CODE.   *
 * USE, DISTRIBUTION AND REPRODUCTION OF THIS LIBRARY SOURCE IS     *
 * GOVERNED BY A BSD-STYLE SOURCE LICENSE INCLUDED WITH THIS SOURCE *
 * IN 'COPYING'. PLEASE READ THESE TERMS BEFORE DISTRIBUTING.       *
 *                                                                  *
 * THE OggVorbis SOURCE CODE IS (C) COPYRIGHT 1994-2002             *
 * by the XIPHOPHORUS Company http://www.xiph.org/                  *
 *                                                                  *
 ********************************************************************


I'm not familiar with the BSD source license though.

EDIT:  This link below will help clarify, perhaps

http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #206 –
Quote
do the vorbis specs/licenses (or whatever) necessarily need the encoders to be open source?

I don't think so :

http://www.vorbis.com/faq.psp#com
Wavpack Hybrid -c4hx6

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #207 –
Quote
do the vorbis specs/licenses (or whatever) necessarily need the encoders to be open source?

Short answer: no.
Microsoft Windows: We can't script here, this is bat country.

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #208 –
Quote
As for FAAC, can I go and legally download an FAAC binary for my BeOS box, my Solaris box, etc?

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

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #209 –
But can you legally use them, without any AAC encoder license (I don't know where you live, but in most countries I believe the answer is no - but I really don' know for sure)?

cya

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #210 –
Not to be the bad guy here, but why is it that this useless flame wars over how terrible the development is over something like Vorbis and how AAC will always get the upper hand over market which we know to be valid, but I mean c'mon folks. Why is it that these "simple" posts always get the most attention?. If for every person I heard complaining about how terrible something was in Vorbis to how little of an effort or how much they could put into something that's need improvement like someone like QuantumKnot for instance then maybe we wouldn't be in this situation. ;-D. People who like Vorbis will use Vorbis, people who like AAC will use AAC. As for development well yes it can be slow considering it's more or less a one man show. I would think you would need more people helping you out and that sort of feeback comes from community too. I don't think it's dieing I see a lot of game developers using in there games that must say something at least. I don't know you decide though. ;-)
budding I.T professional

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #211 –
Quote
As for FAAC, can I go and legally download an FAAC binary for my BeOS box, my Solaris box, etc?  That does not sound very open to me, compared with other open source projects like Linux or Mozilla where the source code is the complete source code and you can compile it wherever you like.  What good is it to obtain a book of MPEG standards when I can't even download suboptimal AAC encoder binaries without being in violation of some license? 

I believe you can download FAAC sources, examine it and compile for educational purposes.

Besides, are you seriously claiming that you haven't ever downloaded and used Lame? If you have, you are just being a big hypocrit here, because it's the exact same thing with it... And how many people you see complaining about this?

One more thing: Due to the unclear patent issues and Xiph's unwillingness to explain these in details, I think we will have to wait for a court decision to see how legal it infact is/was to use Vorbis totally freely after all... So I would use the word "legally" very sparingly here.
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #212 –
Quote
Despite whatever spin is put on the openness of the AAC standard only, it will never belong to the group of OSS projects.


Forgive my ignorance, but what about:

OpenH323, MPEG4IP, Vovida, FFMPEG, XVid, LAME, FAAC/FAAD, mpg123, MAD, etc...  -  these are OSS projects that implement worldwide standards  that are in use in modern telco/mobile equipment, or represent standards for storage like DVD.

Quote
Vorbis seems to fit the OSS criteria better here. Not only do you get the documentation (which I'll admit is not very comprehensive for Vorbis), but also the source code of the main branch, not some volunteer-driven project by another party who are working, based on the standard (ie the only bits of publically-available information).


FAAD2, an AAC decoder, implements all AAC features - not bits of available information, and it does it more efficient than reference decoder from ISO.

Advantage of Vorbis over AAC in OSS projects is its patent-free status, as Xiph claims - which means that the use of the technology is free, unlike AAC.  However, it has many other disadvantages and under certain circumstances these disadvantages are much more important than price of use.

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #213 –
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.

cya

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #214 –
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...
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #215 –
AFAIK, there's no such thing as more legal or less legal. But, if you admit those concepts, I would say that Vorbis is more legal than LAME or FAAC (except maybe for educational purposes). Why? Because I know that LAME and FAAC are illegal in my country. No one yet said the same about Vorbis.

cya

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #216 –
No, they are not illegal - because there was no court case where users of LAME/FAAC have been brought to court and infringement has been proven.

Same applies to Vorbis as well.

Monty's claims that "vobris is patent free", or FhG's claims that "LAME infringes our patents"  mean nothing from the legal point of view - both cases are just claims withuot legal backing (court decision)

However, one might say that the chances to be brought to court are bigger with LAME than Vorbis, but this is also left to be proven in practice.

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #217 –
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
Wavpack Hybrid -c4hx6

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #218 –
AFAIK using LAME, even for encoding my own music is illegal because I don't own a mp3 encoder license. And yes, I admit I rip CDs I don't own knowing it is illegal. But we're not discussing that, are we?

cya

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #219 –
Quote
But we're not discussing that, are we?

cya

No, but I'm still amused by people shouting about licencing conditions of mp3, wma or aac and requesting in the same time more vorbis files on P2P networks (I'm not talking about you).
There are generally a lot of contradictions or funny arguments with vorbis people (or zealots).

- vorbis is the only encoder with fast progress and bug corruction (it's open source)
- vorbis is the only encoder to be stable (EVIL Microsoft or MPEG owners may and will change the format specification in order to annoy users)
- vorbis is the solution against DRM
- vorbis is better quality (though thay can't distinguish CD from vorbis at 64 kbps)
etc...

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.
Wavpack Hybrid -c4hx6

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #220 –
Quote
AFAIK using LAME, even for encoding my own music is illegal because I don't own a mp3 encoder license. And yes, I admit I rip CDs I don't own knowing it is illegal. But we're not discussing that, are we?

At least in LAME's case you know that you need a license. In Vorbis' case you don't really know whether you'd need a license, pay royalties or not.

In MPEG's case patents and licensing are well defined. In Vorbis' case when you ask about patents (even specific patents) from Xiph, at best you can get some vague answer saying that it is ultimately decided in court and they don't comment further. Usual response is just silence though as these things are not specified at all by Xiph.
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #221 –
Quote
Besides, are you seriously claiming that you haven't ever downloaded and used Lame? If you have, you are just being a big hypocrit here, because it's the exact same thing with it... And how many people you see complaining about this?


Hypocrit?  There is an astronomical difference between what is considered legal, from a legality viewpoint, and what average users who log in anonymously on the internet and downloading illegal software do in their spare time.  Yes I have downloaded lame before but that is totally irrelevant, from a legal perspective.  Just because I've clicked on a link to download something doesn't automatically make it legal, nor does it exempt me from making comments about it, from a legal standpoint.  So suddenly, because I have downloaded lame, that its wrong for me to state facts?  So words that appear in the download page of audiocoding.com like

Quote
"Currently binaries can't be downloaded here. Dolby, the AAC licensing authority, won't allow that. "


are not valid because I (the person who downloaded lame) quoted them?

If you wish to take it to such a personal level unnecessarily, something that I never ever intended to do here, then I'm sorry, but I'm not going down to such levels and start spontaneously label people who I disagree with as 'big hypocrits'.

Quote
One more thing: Due to the unclear patent issues and Xiph's unwillingness to explain these in details, I think we will have to wait for a court decision to see how legal it infact is/was to use Vorbis totally freely after all... So I would use the word "legally" very sparingly here.


Until there is an actual legal decision, then the 'illegality' of Vorbis is both hypothetical and speculative.  People can debate till the end of time about it and nothing beneficial comes from it.  When I speak of the illegality of downloading AAC encoder binaries (and you'll notice that is all I speak about in my reply), then I actually base it on black and white statements such as the one I quoted above.  If you believe there are loopholes in the AAC licensing, then by all means, state them.  No need to get so personal.

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #222 –
I'm not a vorbis zealot. It's not even my favorite format. You never heard me saying that Vorbis is the best format or something close. The thing I don't understand is the way patent issues regarding Vorbis are always being brought when someone discusses the future of Vorbis or other issues. I know I'll be using AAC sooner or later. That's not the point. We used to respect Xiph for offering us Vorbis, which offers something that no other format can offer: acceptable quality (at least on par with mp3, but generally slightly better, especially in low/mid bitrates) and, no matter the doubts some may have, freedom of use in every aspect, at least until somebody proves one or more patents are violated. But now, the patent "issues" are taken for granted by some, without any legal certains. That's what I really dislike. And please don't tell that this is Xiph's fault, just because they didn't released the results of their own search.

cya

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #223 –
Quote
When I speak of the illegality of downloading AAC encoder binaries (and you'll notice that is all I speak about in my reply), then I actually base it on black and white statements such as the one I quoted above.  If you believe there are loopholes in the AAC licensing, then by all means, state them.  No need to get so personal.

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.
Juha Laaksonheimo

is vorbis DEAD or NOT

Reply #224 –
Quote
But now, the patent "issues" are taken for granted by some, without any legal certains. That's what I really dislike. And please don't tell that this is Xiph's fault, just because they didn't released the results of their own search.

Nothing about Xiph and patents are taken for granted. That's the whole point. There's uncertainty, and refusement to give details when asked.
Imo there's a reasonable chance that Vorbis is not breaking any valid patents. It's the silence and lack of details from Xiph that makes things uncertain.
Juha Laaksonheimo