similar to: tool for listening tests

This is the new page after the first feedback round: http://audio.sinderman.com/ Comments? Conclusions? Developers feedback? Can someone ABX 60.wav with 60.ogg -q 0? Cheers, AGS. P.S. Garf/Erik, I have included some comments from EAQUAL's author. <p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this

Hi all, Is there a standard set of wave files for testing the quality of the output of oggenc? Ronald ---------------------------------------------- Philips Research Laboratories -- Building WDC <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

Congratulations on inclusion in the Real Helix thing. :-) I do have a question, however. While I am very impressed by Vorbis 1.0's quality even down to "-1", vorbis seems very much a VBR format, which is great if the file lives on your hard drive, but a mixed bag for streaming over a modem connection. How well does Vorbis compare to existing streaming formats, including

You know it's good; I know it's good. I'm talking about Vorbis at 128 as it currently is in CVS. Please participate in a group listening test of various formats to show how Vorbis 128 has improved since RC2. I have prepared three sample music clips comparing Liquid AAC, MPC, pre-RC3 Vorbis, Lame, Xing, and WMA8, similar to the first test. Except I believe that this time Vorbis

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

Here's a tough file to encode well at 128 kbit/s average: https://www.idrive.com/miyaguch/files/Shared/?curr-node=8821135668693434409 "duel.wav" It is the first few seconds from "Duel of the Fates" off of the Star Wars I soundtrack. Vorbis beta 4 at 128 produces artifacts that sound like some tones are beating with others. I identified the Vorbis encode 16 of 16

Hello! I found a sample I can ABX successfully when encoded at 133.333 kbps. I was targetting 1 MB/min. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B8KWShoIrA1kQzR1Z0FFRUlfcEU floex.wav is 4:54–5:04 of a lossless copy of 'Forget-me-not' by Floex, downloaded from http://store.floex.cz/album/zorya floex-133.opus was created with `opusenc --bitrate 133.333333 floex.wav floex-133.opus`,

For those who haven't yet seen this: EarGuy's Digital Ear (physiological model of the ear based on work by Frank Baumgarte) has just finished rating the sound quality of Vorbis beta 4 at 128 kbs using 30 random 10-second selections of music: http://pub41.ezboard.com/fr3mixfrm4.showMessage?topicID=33.topic Two samples on which the Ear says Vorbis performed uncharacteristically poorly

Vorbis, using the AoTuV beta4.51 encoder, come first in a "Public, Multiformat Listening Test @ 128 kbps" organized on Hydrogenaudio forum. Hydrogenaudio thread: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=40607 Presentation: http://www.maresweb.de/listening-tests/mf-128-1/ Results: http://www.maresweb.de/listening-tests/mf-128-1/results.htm

Hello! First of all, 100x thanks to Monty and colleagues: you have done an excellent job! I just didn't believe my ears when I first tested Oggenc 1.0 at q0 to q1 - it sounds AMAZINGLY GOOD !!! But as HDD drives are getting larger and cheaper, most of us move toward higher quality settings ......... I use q8, because: - I was able to ABX some test samples up to q4.99 - at q8 Ogg is still

using iTunes i've noticed that AAC is very good at re-encoding own lossy sound. let's test Opus! neroaacenc.exe -q 0.75 -if 000.wav -of 001.m4a neroaacdec.exe -if 001.m4a -of aac001.wav wavdiff.exe 000.wav aac001.wav Comparing 000.wav - aac001.wav... Max diff: -17.3867dB RMS diff: -33.0851dB Mean diff: -32.4582dB opusenc.exe --bitrate 512 "000.wav" 001.opus opusdec.exe 001.opus

Hi, does anybody know where I can find high quality samples that are in the public domain? It's a plus if they're samples that many codecs have problems with, because I want to use them for a blind test. Thanks. -- patrik_wallstrom->foodfight->pawal@blipp.com->+46-709580442 --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage:

Hi All, I have two questions. I have an icecast2 server installed, and I need to set up a Linux-based computer that sends a church's programs to the icecast server. (Both worship and teaching.) What application do you suggest? It would be really pleasing if I wouldn't need X11 to use the software, and it would display (with charactergraphics) the current signal level. The signal

Hello. I am new to this forum and relatively new to Icecast. I have set up and Icecast broadcast from my computer using Winamp as the playlist and the SAM Encoders to encode to WMA. The broadcast is running perfectly. The only issue is when I create an ASX file that links to my broadcast, it shows my IP address as the title of the broadcast. What do I need to do to change this to a name of my

_+icecast@sucs.org wrote: > Ices, Darkice, most of the normal stream creation bits don't need X11 > Do you mean normalisation? I mean dynamic compression. > WMA is Microsoft only so you will probably need to use Microsoft > software to do this. > > But if you already have MP3 I realy don't see the reason for WMA, as > anything that plays WMA is likely to also

Just looked at http://slashdot.org/articles/02/01/01/0931212.shtml. Why wasn´t this announced at this list? Anyway, terrific work you developers! /Andreas Karlsson http://www.ft2.net <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'

Some CDs will include all the songs encoded with Windows Media, removing the the need for ripping. Sounds like it has the potential to stomp out competition from other formats such as MP3 & OGG. http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1005-201-7320279-0.html --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a

I was able to ABX 60.wav from the lame samples up to q=5.9 (13/16 tries at that quality level). I failed to ABX it at q=6.0 (8/16). The sample exhibits a pumping artifact; a "fluttering", if you will, of the amplitude. The effect becomes more pronounced as quality setting / bitrate decreases. Any thoughts? Also - if anyone replies to this, could you CC me a copy? I'm not on the

Interesting. Not what I expected. This is Ruby 1.8.6. > irb irb(main):001:0> str = "abx\bc" => "abx\bc" irb(main):002:0> str.length => 5 irb(main):003:0> s = str.sub(/.\b/, '''') => "ab\bc" irb(main):004:0> s.length => 4 irb(main):005:0> s = str.sub(/.\x08/, '''') => "abc"

hi folks, in my (unlucky) first test of ogg vs other encoders, i found a case where wma and mp3pro sound much better than ogg at 64k. can anyone suggest a setting that i haven't tried yet that can rival the wma and mp3pro samples at 64k? it's the "gravel effect" that is troublesome. the part in question is the first 15 seconds of this wave file: