PDA

View Full Version : what do you think is the best sound compression format?

wicked_child
05-22-2006, 09:02 AM
mp3, wma, rm, ogg, or others?
PaulR
05-22-2006, 09:18 AM
mp3
rh15951
05-22-2006, 09:34 AM
mp3 also
edgebass5
05-22-2006, 10:07 AM
I think mp3's are the most universal, but they suffer from very bad high-frequency loss. You can really hear it in a lot of mp3's as sort of an electronic "squeaking" noise on upper register parts. Specifically on cymbals.
wicked_child
05-22-2006, 10:15 AM
yeah. i hear that too. as of know, the best for me is ogg. too bad, not all has the codec. :)
HaVIC5
05-22-2006, 10:16 AM
Ogg is by far the best, but isn't very compatible with anything.
Radiobass81
05-22-2006, 10:16 AM
I've really never seen much difference, but, then again, have't had a chance to "compare".
wicked_child
05-22-2006, 10:45 AM
get audiograbber (w/c comes with the ogg codec) try to rip a cd track(one mp3, one ogg, and one wma) and compare. just be sure to use the same bitrates.
bbbbass
05-22-2006, 11:11 AM
Ogg is by far the best, but isn't very compatible with anything.

I hear ya...

Ogg is the best for sure, but we seem to still be in the iPod mindset. Thank God iRiver is Ogg Compatible :).
Damrod
05-22-2006, 01:39 PM
MP3 is all I need. For me, the difference between OGG, MP3 and the others isn't as dramatic as others think it is. *shrugs*

MP3 owns as it is hella compatible :thumb:
ebe9
05-22-2006, 01:54 PM
MP3

Variable Bitrate at highest setting, i.e. the ability to go up to 320KBps if need be seems to work best.

I have not experienced the "squeeking" Edge talks about at this level but on lower quality versions it is present.
Guinpen
05-22-2006, 02:55 PM
This compatibility issue you're all mentioning about ogg is non-existent. What's it "not compatible" with? Basically, the only thing you'll ever find that they will not natively play on, are portable mp3 players that are from 1999, and iPods, because Apple = a bunch of douchebags.

ogg=best by far.
wicked_child
05-22-2006, 04:21 PM
MP3

Variable Bitrate at highest setting, i.e. the ability to go up to 320KBps if need be seems to work best.

I have not experienced the "squeeking" Edge talks about at this level but on lower quality versions it is present.

but the problem is, not all likes to go up to 320 and have a big file size.
Mitchell Royce
05-22-2006, 06:09 PM
^^^
Well, then buy the CD and rip it yourself ;)

For the second time today I agree with ebe9. At a high enough bitrate it is fine to listen to music to casually.
katana_manatee
05-22-2006, 06:16 PM
Definately ogg. far higher quality for your file size than mp3. The problem is it isn't used very much and not a lot of devices support it, which is a huge shame really.
cmogawa
05-22-2006, 11:02 PM
mp3 is the only one that i know
so thats why i think its the best (well i do know about some of the others)
nicatterberry
05-22-2006, 11:14 PM
I don't really care. As long I can listen to my music, I don't have a problem.
cAPS_lOCK
05-23-2006, 12:25 AM
.ogg is the best, but .mp3 is what I use. My old Creative Jukebox doesn't support anything else but .mp3 and .wma (and .wav, but hey).
FunkMetalBass
05-23-2006, 12:31 AM
Well, I'd go with wma, just because I've had the best results with it. Many things are converting to .wma capabilities now, and it is better than an mp3.
TwiTcHyHanDs
05-23-2006, 12:38 AM
.ogg

That has to be the best i think.
Guinpen
05-23-2006, 12:42 AM
Well, I'd go with wma, just because I've had the best results with it. Many things are converting to .wma capabilities now, and it is better than an mp3.

wma's tend to be big on file size, and they lack the compatibility of mp3 and ogg. i haven't really seen anything that's converting to it that isn't from microsoft
FunkMetalBass
05-23-2006, 12:45 AM
wma's tend to be big on file size, and they lack the compatibility of mp3 and ogg. i haven't really seen anything that's converting to it that isn't from microsoft
But the question wasn't about file size and ease of use.

From experience, that's what I've liked best.

Sometimes I rip to .wav. Talk about HUGE files.
Guinpen
05-23-2006, 01:08 AM
But the question wasn't about file size and ease of use.

From experience, that's what I've liked best.

Sometimes I rip to .wav. Talk about HUGE files.

you said 'best results' and 'better,' which concerning audio codecs, usually deals with quality:file size

ripping just to wav!? that's kind of crazy. you must have tons of space
wicked_child
05-23-2006, 08:21 AM
Well, I'd go with wma, just because I've had the best results with it. Many things are converting to .wma capabilities now, and it is better than an mp3.


yeah, but in lower bitrates, wma is worse than mp3 bec of high frequency signal loss. they are clearer and does not sound like a lofi soundclick stream in lower bitrates but no one can stand those cymbals sounding like squeking aliens. :)