Displaying 20 results from an estimated 2000 matches similar to: "Vorbis beta4 and -b256 mode quality"
2001 Aug 07
4
Some pre-RC1 listening tests
Hello everyone,
ff123 compiled Monty's branch of the RC1 encoder, see his post on
r3mix.net forum:
http://66.96.216.160/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?board=c&action=display&num=994299736&start=30
Anyway it only supports ~128kbps mode, so I did a quick listening
test with some files that bugged vorbis beta4.
grace.wav - the right channel is still a bit watery, and I think this
can be seen
2001 Aug 14
1
udial.wav problem
I was doing some testing with RC2 and I noticed that RC2 doesn't
encode past 19kHz with this clip (-b256 and -b350). There are no
problems with this clip like it was before, but this clip contains
signal past 19kHz which is audible as a faint high-frequency hiss -
and that hiss is gone in the encoded file since RC2 cuts off at 19kHz.
I think that -b256 and -b350 should encode at least up to
2002 Jan 13
3
RC3: I'm impressed
SUMMARY
I'm impressed.
RC3 withstood anything I could throw at it. "-q 3" is really Vorbis' sweet
spot, almost perfect, and "-q 0" is eminently usable, with only marginal
defects for normal usage.
Already sent money, will do that again.
* * *
I spent at least 40 hours in the last week testing RC3. I selected a few
fragments from pop, classic and jazz CDs in my
2000 Nov 18
4
Beta3 impressions
I tested Vorbis encoder - beta3 version, and here are my thoughts:
- In comparison to beta2, subtle high-frequency artifacts seem to be gone
(though they were small in beta2). Good job there! :-)
- Velvet.wav also sounds better, but transparent quality is reached
at -b256+.
- Horn.wav still sounds very sucky, mode -b256 gives ~100kbps (this
is understandable because in this sample practically
2001 Mar 01
2
Pre-echo like noises on Beta4
Hi, there.
Although I'm not a hacker at all, I noticed an audible noise on Beta
4 encoded files. So, I'd like to report it here.
I ripped and encoded 'A Day Without Rain' on the album with the same
name By Enya into Vorbis using Oggenc and Oggdrop Beta 4 from the Vorbis
site. (You know, she is quite an encoder-killer.) At all the bitrates,
files encoded by Oggdrop had audible
2001 Jan 11
2
MP3pro
So it looks like the Frauenhoffer boys are issuing an updated format --
MP3pro. They claim that it will give 128kbps/MP3 quality in 64kbps.
I'm interested to see what others think of this.
I'm also curious: I've seen others on the list say that Ogg/Vorbis' sound
quality is "better" than MP3. Can this be quantified (or is this already
on a web page somewhere)? I kinda
2013 Jun 05
1
[LLVMdev] TableGen lookup table recipe?
Is it possible to define lookup tables as a list in tablegen, to map one
value to another? Here's the template I was working on:
=========================================
class LookupTable {
list<int> mapping = [0, 8, 16, 24, 32];
}
def LUT : LookupTable;
class MyRegister<name, index> : Register<name> {
let HWEncoding = LUT.mapping[index];
int otherVal = index;
2001 Aug 15
10
RC2 worse than RC1 and Beta4
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
2019 Jul 31
3
GPO issues - getting SYSVOL cleaned up again
Am 31.07.19 um 13:37 schrieb L.P.H. van Belle via samba:
> So if i understand correctly.
> You removed : /var/lib/samba/private/dns_update_cache
>
> Stopped samba and started samba and you got the dns A for hostname DC back
> in /var/lib/samba/private/dns_update_cache ??
Yes!
repeated that once more now. Same result.
> Hmm..
>> SOA contains
2009 Mar 25
2
v1.2.beta4 released
http://dovecot.org/releases/1.2/beta/dovecot-1.2.beta4.tar.gz
http://dovecot.org/releases/1.2/beta/dovecot-1.2.beta4.tar.gz.sig
This release fixes a memory corruption bug related to MODSEQ handling in
earlier v1.2 releases. Memory corruption means that it's a security bug
and possibly exploitable. MODSEQ code is new in v1.2, so v1.1 and older
releases are not affected.
Other than that, there
2009 Mar 25
2
v1.2.beta4 released
http://dovecot.org/releases/1.2/beta/dovecot-1.2.beta4.tar.gz
http://dovecot.org/releases/1.2/beta/dovecot-1.2.beta4.tar.gz.sig
This release fixes a memory corruption bug related to MODSEQ handling in
earlier v1.2 releases. Memory corruption means that it's a security bug
and possibly exploitable. MODSEQ code is new in v1.2, so v1.1 and older
releases are not affected.
Other than that, there
2007 Oct 23
4
v1.1.beta4 released
http://dovecot.org/releases/1.1/beta/dovecot-1.1.beta4.tar.gz
http://dovecot.org/releases/1.1/beta/dovecot-1.1.beta4.tar.gz.sig
Lots of fixes since beta3, but apparently there are still a few bugs
left:
- Is SORT working?
- APPEND seems to have problems in some setups.
- Still some SEARCH TEXT problems? Or Squat indexing problems?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment
2010 Mar 24
1
2.0.beta4 compile errors
I am unable to get 2.0.beta4 to compile. I get the following errors:
/usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-slackware-linux/4.3.3/../../../../lib64/libwrap.a(hosts_access.o):
In function `host_match':
hosts_access.c:(.text+0x625): undefined reference to `yp_get_default_domain'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[3]: *** [tcpwrap] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory
2006 Mar 28
2
6.1-BETA4-i386-disc2.iso - only usr/share/doc, no usr/src?
Does the 6.1-BETA4-i386-disc2.iso contain only usr/share/doc, or for
some reason i am unable to see anything else? I was looking for
usr/src (and for a odd chance to have usr/ports); i suppose those
two trees would be available somewhere on some disc for RELENG_6_1.
I mounted the image as ...
mdconfig -a -t vnode -f /path/to/6.1-BETA4-i386-disc2.iso -u 0
mount -t cd9660 /dev/md0 /mnt
...
2010 Aug 24
1
asterisk-1.8.0-beta4 - compile error
Hi,
I tried to compile asterisk-1.8.0-beta4 but after ./configure && make
I've got following error:
[CC] res_fax.c -> res_fax.o
[LD] res_fax.o -> res_fax.so
[CC] res_fax_spandsp.c -> res_fax_spandsp.o
res_fax_spandsp.c:117: error: field ?fax_state? has incomplete type
res_fax_spandsp.c:118: error: field ?t38_state? has incomplete type
res_fax_spandsp.c: In function
2001 Aug 02
1
Encoder differences, beta4 -> 1.0rc1
Hi all,
Were there encoder differences between beta4 and 1.0rc1? A precompiled
oggenc for Windows identifies itself as beta4, and from a certain mono
file produces 53.3 kb/s files, whereas one I've compiled myself,
identifying itself as 1.0rc1, produces 55.9 kb/s. Is this a feature or
a bug?
Also, all the links to images at the top of:
http://www.vorbis.com/download_win.psp
are broken.
2003 Jan 29
0
VP3 for xine 1.0-beta4
Hi,
Some of you may recall that I got the VP3 decoder working with the
xine multimedia player some time ago and posted a patch for anyone else
to try. I really messed up when I did that since I generated the patch
against some random CVS snapshot of xine-lib. I did better this time and
generated the patch against the latest release of xine-lib (1.0-beta4,
released today).
If you
2002 Jan 18
0
Beta4 better than RC2 and RC3 ???
Hello,
I hope you won't mind if I give you mine opinion and suggestions about
Vorbis audio encoder, especially new version.
I was pretty satisfied with the quality of Beta4 encoder. For a bitrates
around 112 to 128 kb/s I consider it better then any other audio
compression formats (MP3, AAC, ...) at same bitrate. Sound quality that
this version produces with bitrates below 112 kb/s was not
2001 Aug 23
3
RC2 vs. beta4 (test)
Hi!
I would like to share with you an interesting test result.
I re-encoded a song 10 times (the 2. made from the 1.,
the 3. made from the 2.,... the 10. made from the 9.),
with a beta4 (CVS 20010620)
and with an RC2 (CVS 20010817) library version,
256 kbit/s mode, channel coupling disabled at RC2.
The beta4 is very good at the 10. encoding too,
but the RC2 has some interesting quality bugs.
So,
2006 Apr 04
1
plain auth problem with beta4
Using kmail with PLAIN authentication worked fine with beta3 but trying it
with beta4 authentication fails.
This is because kmail sends "username \0 username \0 password" in the
authorization token and the new code to call
auth_request_set_login_username() when supplied an authid must be returning
failure (certainly commenting this code out returns to the beta3 behaviour of