search for: nspsytun

For those who are interested, I've run 3 EAQUAL tests on both the LAME and OGG encoders: LAME with the --alt-standard preset (with and without --nspsytune) and OGGENC (RC3) with -q 6 (my personal "sweet spot") I am somewhat unsure though about the validity of these tests, since the original and decoded files were not the same size (2 KB difference). The LAME encoded files were also DEcoded by LAME (--decode), and the OGG encoded files wer...

...in addition to a noisy (fluttering) voice, for example at 3.5 seconds, and pre-echo in the snaps. s27, though, is somewhat puzzling to me because I think it sounds ok. Overall at 128 kbs, Vorbis definitely performed better than FhG FastEnc, and probably performed better than Lame 3.88b using --nspsytune at the same bitrates (except for the two samples above, which pulled down its rating). From my own subjective listening tests, I'd agree that Vorbis beta 4 sounds better than the best mp3 codecs at 128 kbs for most music. ff123 --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/...

ARGH! I am at a complete loss as to which OGG quality settings to use: 8? 10? 3? I'd like to be able to listen to my primarily Rock oriented music on a high-end system (though I don't own one - yet) without any noticeable sound degradation, but I don't want to go total overkill with -q 10. With LAME, I at least used to know 192 kbps with -q0 was a perfect size/quality proportion. I

After doing an informal (128k) listening test, I have concluded that I prefer Beta4 over RC2. The 16kHz low-pass on the RC2 encoder makes it sound like FM radio. Both encoders SEEM to have a couple of dB bump at 10kHz. JT --- >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