Ogg Vs Mp3 with Linux.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I have a client who would like all of his work delievered in Ogg format
at 128Kbps.
As I am not too familiar with Ogg I would like to know what others
think of the quality and also the size of the files?
Is Ogg a viable platform or should I suggest something else.?

I am using Linux with Ardour hard disk recording system and the Jammin
mastering plugin set.
Apologies for my poor English.
Winston
19 answers Last reply
More about linux
  1. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    "Winston Rectus" <winston_rectus@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    > I have a client who would like all of his work delievered in Ogg
    > format at 128Kbps. As I am not too familiar with Ogg I would like to
    > know what others think of the quality and also the size of the files?
    > Is Ogg a viable platform or should I suggest something else.?


    There's nothing wrong with Ogg. It sounds about the same as mp3 with
    slightly smaller file sizes.

    The problem is that it's not a universal format. Geeks will have
    players that support the Ogg format, but most "ordinary" people won't.
    Anyone who has a computer will have a player that supports mp3.

    If the target audience is a limited group known to have players that
    support it, Ogg is fine. If the target is a more universal audience,
    I'd recommend sticking with mp3.

    --
    "It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
    - Lorin David Schultz
    in the control room
    making even bad news sound good

    (Remove spamblock to reply)
  2. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    The MP3 format has patents covering it which are being actively
    enforced, if I recall correctly. With OGG, since it is free of patents,
    free of secrets and not tied to any one company, people are guaranteed
    to be able to do useful things to their audio in the future and
    guaranteed that programs will support it.

    Of course, end listeners don't care (until they can't access their
    files in a few years, as happens again and again with Company X's
    software).. if you deliver your audio in MP2 format
    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP2_%28format%29), the files should work
    in any MP3 player and also be free of patent troubles unlike MP3.
  3. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    On 13 Aug 2005 09:21:10 -0700, in rec.audio.pro "Winston Rectus"
    <winston_rectus@yahoo.com> wrote:

    >I have a client who would like all of his work delievered in Ogg format
    >at 128Kbps.
    >As I am not too familiar with Ogg I would like to know what others
    >think of the quality and also the size of the files?
    >Is Ogg a viable platform or should I suggest something else.?
    >
    >I am using Linux with Ardour hard disk recording system and the Jammin
    >mastering plugin set.
    >Apologies for my poor English.
    >Winston
    try here for an explanation
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogg-Vorbis
    many links about the system


    martin
  4. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 09:21:10 -0700, Winston Rectus wrote:

    > I have a client who would like all of his work delievered in Ogg format
    > at 128Kbps.
    > As I am not too familiar with Ogg I would like to know what others
    > think of the quality and also the size of the files?
    > Is Ogg a viable platform or should I suggest something else.?

    If it's 128Kbps ogg they want, it's 128Kbps ogg they get.
    Most people find it a little better than Mp3 at the same bitrate.

    I would suggest giving them uncompressed versions as well, any lossy
    format, particularly at a low bitrate, is useless as a master.

    >
    > I am using Linux with Ardour hard disk recording system and the Jammin
    > mastering plugin set.
    > Apologies for my poor English.
    > Winston
  5. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    "Lorin David Schultz" <Lorin@DAMNSPAM!v5v.ca> wrote in news:reqLe.175916
    $9A2.147743@edtnps89:

    > If the target audience is a limited group known to have players that
    > support it, Ogg is fine. If the target is a more universal audience,
    > I'd recommend sticking with mp3.

    As Ogg is freeware, there's nothing to stop the OP from offering links or
    free downloads of the player software.
  6. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    Winston Rectus wrote:

    > I have a client who would like all of his work delievered in Ogg format
    > at 128Kbps.
    > As I am not too familiar with Ogg I would like to know what others
    > think of the quality and also the size of the files?
    > Is Ogg a viable platform or should I suggest something else.?

    I'm not sure that you CAN force the Ogg-vorbis system to use a specific
    bit-rate, generally it uses a variable bitrate scheme, which generally
    gives better result anyway (as with MP3).

    One of the things which sold me on Ogg many years ago was that I was able to
    detect artifacts in MP3 quite easily, but with Ogg you have to really screw
    the quality right down before it starts to go peculiar.

    It is also popular with software development, e.g. games or any other
    black-box application where you would want compressed audio.. there are
    no license fees, and the reference implementation is pretty much in the
    public domain so you can just take it and go.

    As a rule Linux comes with the Ogg toolset included. You can do a basic
    conversion from the command-line as follows:

    oggenc input.wav

    ...and you'll get a shiny 'input.ogg' file in the current directory.
    Likewise:

    oggenc *.wav

    ...will convert all .wav files in the current directory to .ogg files.

    Setting tags and other metadata is a bit more involved, although it can be
    done from the command line.. 'oggenc --help' will tell you how.
    When ripping CDs for listening at the PC, I usually use a script and a set
    of description files to set the titles.
    Of course, you can get GUI utilities to do batch conversions or set the tags
    after a previous conversion. I think XMMS will let you edit the tags
    graphically.
    Ardour may allow you to mix down to Ogg files without needing any conversion
    afterwards, I don't know. Audacity does.

    Hope that helps,

    --
    JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- jpm@it-he.org
    Anti-walkthroughs for Deus Ex, Thief and Ultima http://www.it-he.org
    Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org
    The DMFA radio series project http://dmfa.it-he.org
    d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB----
    uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976)
  7. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    "Blind Hog" <blind_hog@acorn.com> wrote:
    >
    > As Ogg is freeware, there's nothing to stop the OP from offering
    > links or free downloads of the player software.


    When I visit a web site that requires downloading and installing
    software to access the content, I go away. I can't be bothered.

    It's the designer's call, but why put up impediments when the object is
    to get people to listen?

    Like I said, it depends on the target audience. It the target is the
    public at large, don't make 'em jump through hoops, because most people
    won't.

    --
    "It CAN'T be too loud... some of the red lights aren't even on yet!"
    - Lorin David Schultz
    in the control room
    making even bad news sound good

    (Remove spamblock to reply)
  8. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    Lorin David Schultz wrote:

    > When I visit a web site that requires downloading and installing
    > software to access the content, I go away. I can't be bothered.
    >
    > It's the designer's call, but why put up impediments when the object is
    > to get people to listen?

    I don't think we were told what the project actually is. It might be a
    soundtrack for a computer game, or a set of recorded announcements for a PA
    system. Ogg would be ideal for either of those.

    > Like I said, it depends on the target audience. It the target is the
    > public at large, don't make 'em jump through hoops, because most people
    > won't.

    Indeed.

    --
    JP Morris - aka DOUG the Eagle (Dragon) -=UDIC=- jpm@it-he.org
    Anti-walkthroughs for Deus Ex, Thief and Ultima http://www.it-he.org
    Reign of the Just - An Ultima clone http://rotj.it-he.org
    The DMFA radio series project http://dmfa.it-he.org
    d+++ e+ N+ T++ Om U1234!56!7'!S'!8!9!KAW u++ uC+++ uF+++ uG---- uLB----
    uA--- nC+ nR---- nH+++ nP++ nI nPT nS nT wM- wC- y a(YEAR - 1976)
  9. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux.suse,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.windows-xp (More info?)

    "Tomas Dietz" <xilo_fone@yahoo.com> writes:

    >Which is precisely why Linux is such a dismal failure for an end users
    >desktop kit. Using Linux is like pulling teeth because nothing ever
    >goes easy with Linux.I have tried several variants of Linux my latest

    Huh. Just buy an mp3 encoder. Just like you have to do with Windows. MP3 is
    patented and thus in the USA you must pay to use it without violating
    patent law (assuming the patent is valid).
    Or you could use lame, which can be used legally wherever the patent is not
    valid.

    You have a choice. And by all reports lame does a very good job of
    encoding.
    I do not use mp3 because of the attrocious sound of mp3, but YMMV

    >attempt being Ubuntu and Soosie and it's always the same story.
    >Websites with multimedia content have all kinds of troubles. Microsoft

    Like what?

    >Office documents do not import correctly into openorifice.

    Microsoft office documents do not import correctly into Microsoft office.

    >I think Linux has an earned reputation for being stable only because
    >it's very difficult to make it interact with the rest of the world most
    >of whom are using Windows. Windows might be as stable as linux if all
    >it did was sit there and do nothing.

    Mhh, wonder why I seem to have no trouble interacting with the world
    through my computer. Must be imagining it.


    >Maybe in 10 years Linux might approach the ease of use and market that
    >Windows has now but I doubt it.
    >Linux is free, yet it is virtually unknown and unused outside of the
    >geek world.
    >BTW using OGG for any type of web content is the kiss of death.
    >People will take a look and leave because they don't have the plugin.

    Depends on who you want to use it with. If with your own friends who have
    the ogg plugin, then fine. You can also always put in a link to a plugin.
    But in general I agree that if you want to have something that most people
    can use, use mp3.

    >>
    >> When I visit a web site that requires downloading and installing
    >> software to access the content, I go away. I can't be bothered.

    Me too. Flash, acrobat,....
  10. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux.suse,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.windows-xp (More info?)

    begin virus.txt.scr Tomas Dietz wrote:

    < snip >

    Good. And now get lost, cretin
    --
    Just out of curiosity does this actually mean something or have some
    of the few remaining bits of your brain just evaporated?
  11. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux.suse,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.windows-xp (More info?)

    Tomas Dietz wrote something like:

    > Which is precisely why Linux is such a dismal failure for an end users

    Geez DFS, can't you stick to the one name?

    --
    -
    I use linux. Can anyone give me a good reason to use Windows?
    -
  12. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux.suse,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.windows-xp (More info?)

    On Wed, 17 Aug 2005 12:09:32 -0700, Tomas Dietz wrote:

    > Which is precisely why Linux is such a dismal failure for an end users
    > desktop kit. Using Linux is like pulling teeth because nothing ever
    > goes easy with Linux.I have tried several variants of Linux my latest
    > attempt being Ubuntu and Soosie and it's always the same story.

    The only story is the fairy tale you're telling here. I will give you that
    SUSE can be a problem with certain kinds of multimedia until you sort it
    out, but SUSE and Novell can't afford to have trouble with patents, which
    is the reason they leave out Mp3 and DVD decryption. It's not a big deal
    to put it in for yourself, and there's a very nice comprehensive How-To on
    it - just google for it.

    > Websites with multimedia content have all kinds of troubles. Microsoft
    > Office documents do not import correctly into openorifice.

    Open-*what* was that? Please don't use such terms, unless you want your
    trolling outed in the first paragraph.

    > I think Linux has an earned reputation for being stable only because
    > it's very difficult to make it interact with the rest of the world most
    > of whom are using Windows. Windows might be as stable as linux if all
    > it did was sit there and do nothing.

    You are out of your mind. What the hell do you suppose most of the
    internet runs on? Certainly not Windows.

    > Maybe in 10 years Linux might approach the ease of use and market that
    > Windows has now but I doubt it.

    Your opinion isn't worth much, I'm afraid.

    > Linux is free, yet it is virtually unknown and unused outside of the
    > geek world.

    Absolutely and utterly wrong. The last person who mention Linux to me,
    without any prompting whatever, was a warehouse operative from the factory
    where I work. Hardly a geek, right?

    > BTW using OGG for any type of web content is the kiss of death.
    > People will take a look and leave because they don't have the plugin.
    > FFT

    Then offer a link to the plugin. Any decent media player will support ogg
    anyway.

    --
    Kier
  13. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux.suse,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.windows-xp (More info?)

    Tomas Dietz wrote:
    > Which is precisely why Linux is such a dismal failure for an end users
    > desktop kit. Using Linux is like pulling teeth because nothing ever
    > goes easy with Linux.I have tried several variants of Linux my latest
    > attempt being Ubuntu and Soosie and it's always the same story.
    > Websites with multimedia content have all kinds of troubles. Microsoft
    > Office documents do not import correctly into openorifice.
    > I think Linux has an earned reputation for being stable only because
    > it's very difficult to make it interact with the rest of the world most
    > of whom are using Windows. Windows might be as stable as linux if all
    > it did was sit there and do nothing.
    > Maybe in 10 years Linux might approach the ease of use and market that
    > Windows has now but I doubt it.
    > Linux is free, yet it is virtually unknown and unused outside of the
    > geek world.
    > BTW using OGG for any type of web content is the kiss of death.
    > People will take a look and leave because they don't have the plugin.
    > FFT


    Why not use WAV? that plays in ALL players, browsers etc. etc...

    I use OGG wherever I can, but I still have not found a decent hack for
    my MP3-stick jet...
  14. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux.suse,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.windows-xp (More info?)

    Patrick Grimbergen wrote:
    > Why not use WAV? that plays in ALL players, browsers etc. etc...
    >
    > I use OGG wherever I can, but I still have not found a decent hack for
    > my MP3-stick jet...

    That's because it's an MP3-stick rather than an Ogg-stick... :)
  15. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux.suse,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.windows-xp (More info?)

    Tomas Dietz wrote:
    > Which is precisely why Linux is such a dismal failure for an end users
    > desktop kit.

    Not for me. Does everything I want. Games, multimedia, networking, web.
    Even plays ever-so-nicely with my WinPC.

    > Using Linux is like pulling teeth because nothing ever
    > goes easy with Linux.

    So you had Windows sussed out the first day you used it? MCSE the week
    after?...

    > I have tried several variants of Linux my latest
    > attempt being Ubuntu and Soosie and it's always the same story.

    No guts, no glory. I started with Red Hat 5.2 in '98. Took months just
    to get a GUI up and running.

    > I think Linux has an earned reputation for being stable only because
    > it's very difficult to make it interact with the rest of the world most
    > of whom are using Windows.

    Difficult for you. Not for us.

    > Maybe in 10 years Linux might approach the ease of use and market that
    > Windows has now but I doubt it.

    If Windows was so easy to use/fix/administer I wouldn't be constantly
    bombarded with phone calls from Windows-using co-workers requesting help.

    It might have been easy back when all you could do was type a letter and
    print it off but XP is light years away from Win95 in features. Features
    require effort to train oneself in the use of, provide opportunities for
    things to go wrong and add complexity to the basic operating system.

    I've spent many hours Googling to fix issues with my own and others' WinPCs.

    Then consider the time spent setting up Windows XP with all the software
    that comes standard with linux distros.

    Typing in serial numbers, rebooting, searching for program updates,
    downloading individual updates from various vendors' web sites, applying
    updates, rebooting, etc...

    With linux there's no serial numbers to worry about, all software is
    installed and updated along with the operating system.

    > Linux is free, yet it is virtually unknown and unused outside of the
    > geek world.

    Not so. I know of several people using linux at home. It's a small
    percentage compared to Win users but not when compared to Apple users.

    --
    Toosmoky
    Ride the Penguin...
    http://toosmoky.d2.net.au
  16. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux.suse,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.windows-xp (More info?)

    StraightEight wrote:
    > I have a client who liked all of his work delievered in DSP Group
    > TrueSpeech, 1 Bit Mono, 8khz, 1kpbs. Seemed an awful shame after we
    > recorded everything 24 bit 96khz.... but the target audience is linux
    > users.
    >

    your client was probably more worried about his bandwith...
    also OGG needs less diskspace then MP3, because of the smaller filesize.
  17. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux.suse,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.windows-xp (More info?)

    Unruh wrote:
    ......
    > I do not use mp3 because of the attrocious sound of mp3, but YMMV
    If you think MP3s sound atrocious, you must be using a bad mp3 encoder.
    Try LAME. You might find that LAMEd MP3s are very good. Ogg may still
    have an advantage over MP3, but that is traded off for processing power.
    In other words, what Ogg does by making a better audio file at lower bit
    rates has the dis-advantage, such as in low power portable devices, of
    using more CPU, thus reducing the play time-battery life of a portable
    player when compared to the MP3 equivalent. For desktops and such, this
    is of course not relevant.

    CD
  18. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro,comp.os.linux.misc,alt.os.linux.suse,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.os.windows-xp (More info?)

    Patrick Grimbergen wrote:

    > StraightEight wrote:
    >> I have a client who liked all of his work delievered in DSP Group
    >> TrueSpeech, 1 Bit Mono, 8khz, 1kpbs. Seemed an awful shame after we
    >> recorded everything 24 bit 96khz.... but the target audience is linux
    >> users.
    >>
    >
    > your client was probably more worried about his bandwith...
    > also OGG needs less diskspace then MP3, because of the smaller filesize.

    Not necessarily, depending on the encoding quality. Scene standard is Q5
    which is roughly equivalent in size to an 128k CBR mp3, but with much
    better quality of sound.
  19. Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

    Nate Behra wrote:
    > Patrick Grimbergen wrote:
    >
    >>StraightEight wrote:
    >>>I have a client who liked all of his work delievered in DSP Group
    >>>TrueSpeech, 1 Bit Mono, 8khz, 1kpbs. Seemed an awful shame after we
    >>>recorded everything 24 bit 96khz.... but the target audience is linux
    >>>users.
    >>>
    >>your client was probably more worried about his bandwith...
    >>also OGG needs less diskspace then MP3, because of the smaller filesize.
    >
    > Not necessarily, depending on the encoding quality. Scene standard is Q5
    > which is roughly equivalent in size to an 128k CBR mp3, but with much
    > better quality of sound.

    Are you talking OGG or TrueSpreech
    -> if TrueSpeech, I don't know enough of it.
    -> of OGG, you are totally wright, if my MP3stick would be playing OGG
    file I would ditch MP3 without a thought. Everything I do myself is
    already in OGG, but what others do, I don't care to transform, because I
    will have to change it back if I want to listen on my mp3stick.

    I did seriously look for an OGG-stick, or at least a portable MP3-player
    that plays OGG Vorbis files, but had no luck finding (a relatively
    cheap) one. -> something for the industry to do something about
    :)
Ask a new question

Read More

Pro Audio MP3 Linux Audio