Q: Is there any testing against a collection of known "hard-to-encode" clips before new releases? It would be an obvious thing, if you want to be serious about quality. I brought this up because I tried latest cvs version of oggenc on one of these standard clips I have. It's a 6 sec long clip of an applause. Heavy noise is easy to hear with qualities 0 to 5,99. (This corresponds to bitrates from ~100 kbit/s to ~300 kbit/s) The clip is available at: http://lame.sourceforge.net/download/samples/applaud.wav /Erik <p>--- >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@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
I think c44.wav should be checked out. http://sjeng.sourceforge.net/ftp/vorbis/c44.flac Using the latest binary (link posted here a few minutes ago), even with -q9.5 I can still hear pre-echo, but using RC2 Garf Tuned 2 (-b 350) I can't. The most striking thing is that with -q9.5 I get an average bitrate of 366kbps but with RC2 GT2 it's only 312kbps and it still sounds better !!! I think v1.0 should have more sensitive trigger when it deals with transient signals (or some kind of a switch to control that would do). <p>Aleksandar <p><p><p>--- >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@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.