I am interetsed to know views on how does best quality ogg compression compare with SHN or whether this is this really comparing apples with oranges because SHN does not compress that greatly? I am on a Music list that is doing a Tape Tree. I guess Grateful dead have made SHN the cult leader format. -- Raena Lea-Shannon --- >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.
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003, Raena Lea-Shannon wrote:> I am interetsed to know views on how does best quality ogg compression compare > with SHN or whether this is this really comparing apples with oranges because > SHN does not compress that greatly?Yes and no, because Shorten is a lossless compressor, while Ogg is a lossy codec. If you prefer a lossless compressor, give a try to Flac. It compresses better than the old SHN. (http://flac.sourceforge.net) <p> -- Giuliano. --- >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.
Raena Lea-Shannon wrote:> I am interetsed to know views on how does best quality ogg compression compare > with SHN or whether this is this really comparing apples with oranges because > SHN does not compress that greatly? > > I am on a Music list that is doing a Tape Tree.apples/oranges. Vorbis will usually compress much "smaller" because it is "lossy" compression, meaning it discards audio data that isn't considered significant. "Lossy" compression is not desireable for tape/CDR trees, which want exact duplication without generational quality loss. SHN is non-lossy. I use & recommend FLAC, which is open source, non-lossy, and compresses a little better than SHN. FLAC, like Vorbis, is currently Xiph's baby. FLAC info: http://flac.sourceforge.net/news.html Non lossy methods compared: http://flac.sourceforge.net/comparison.html (Note: Shorten is the correct name for SHN.) > I guess Grateful dead have made SHN the cult leader format. Phish have embraced the FLAC. As Phish seem to be the new Dead, I consider the torch passed. http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/06/24/046255 Es. <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 am interetsed to know views on how does best quality ogg compression compare >with SHN or whether this is this really comparing apples with oranges because >SHN does not compress that greatly? > >I am on a Music list that is doing a Tape Tree. I guess Grateful dead have >made SHN the cult leader format. >-- >Raena Lea-ShannonHi Raena, Actually, since Phish switched over from distributing their shows in SHN to what they now use which is Ogg Flac, it seems that Flac is rapidly bypassing Shorten (SHN) for leadership in the lossless compression space, even amongst cult/Jamband fans. All the best, -- Brian Zisk --- >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.