XiphWiki - User contributions [en]

Vorbis Encoders

2014-12-11T13:44:51Z

TimSmall: /* AoTuV */ Fix soundexpert listening test commentry

== Vorbis-OptSort ==
[http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon/6809/vorbis-optsort-en.html Vorbis-OptSort] improves source code of the Vorbis codec library (libvorbis-1.2.0) to accelerate encoding time about 10%.

== AoTuV ==
[http://www.geocities.jp/aoyoume/aotuv/ aoTuV encoders] are optimized encoders for higher quality.
* The latest release is aoTuV beta6.03 (May 2014) - correct as-of December 2014.
* The latest stable release is aoTuV Release 1 (August 2006) AKA aoTuV beta 4.51, which improves quality at q < 3 (versus aoTuV beta4).
* aoTuV beta4 (June 2005) improved quality at all bitrates (versus xiph.org 1.1.2) and can also go down to 32 Kb/s (q-2). Note that this patch also include the [http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon/6809/vorbis-optsort-en.html Vorbis-OptSort] patch.
* aoTuV beta2 (April 2004) was adopted as a part of Vorbis 1.1.0 (September 2004) (quality wise all versions of official Xiph.Org libraries from 1.1.0 up to 1.2.1 are the same as aoTuV beta2).

Subjective listening test of aoTuV beta5.7 vs. libvorbis 1.2.3 (and other audio codecs):

* [http://soundexpert.org/encoders-80-kbps soundexpert.org Encoders 80 kbit/s] - at the time of writing (December 2014), aoTuV has the best average score of any encoder, although it's worse-case performance is worse than that of some other encoders.

Quality test of aoTuV beta4 vs. libvorbis 1.1.1:

* [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=35438 80Kbps comparison of many audio codec and libvorbis 1.1.1 vs. aoTuV beta4]
** libvorbis 1.1.1 ABR vs libvorbis 1.1.1 VBR vs aoTuV beta4 VBR summary:
:: http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.07/80/80TEST_PLOTS_04.png

" on group1, all encoders are tied (although aoTuV is better than 1.1.1
with 90% confidence). It’s a disappointment for me, because I’ve seriously
expected from aoTuV to reduce the level of coarseness/fatness on this specific
musical genre. However, slight improvements were often perceptible – it’s
better than nothing. With some samples, a slight regression was also perceptible:
additional distortion or apparently restrictive lowpass (noticed with harpsichord).
Interesting to note that ABR doesn’t perform badly, except on critical samples
(bitrate stayed at ~85 kbps when VBR encodings reached 160!); ABR also sounded a
bit better with some samples (tonal one). Good point to ABR (just note that encoding
speed is dramatically slow compared to VBR).
on group 2, differences are much more defined. ABR appeared as clearly worse than
VBR and aoTuV beta 4 outdid 1.1.1 on VBR mode. Obviously, the changes Aoyumi made on
vorbis are much more effective on various music.
on average, aoTuV beta 4 was better than 1.1.1 (not a surprise I would say)."

"Vorbis (aoTuV beta 4, VBR –q 0,9): this is by far the most
enjoying thing I’ve heard at this bitrate. I was highly surprised
by results I’ve got with the 150 classical samples; I was literally
astonished by the final score obtained with the 35 remaining samples!
Vorbis is obviously an amazing tool at this bitrate." guruboolez

* [http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/VideoSon/MP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm 96Kbps comparison of many audio codec and libvorbis 1.1.1 vs. aoTuV beta4 (french)]
** [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.hardware.fr%2Fhardwarefr%2FVideoSon%2FMP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Google traduction]
** libvorbis 1.1.1 vs aoTuV beta4 summary:
:: http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.07/96/96TEST_PLOTS_04.png
* [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=36465 180Kbps comparison of many audio codec on classical music]
: Comment on AoTuV beta 4:
"Vorbis: Vorbis is now –thanks to Aoyumi– an excellent audio format for 180
kbps encodings (and classical music). It has apparently no flaws (lowest note
was 3.5) but only minor problems audible from time to time: additional noise,
fatness, or softened details. One third of the tested samples are transparent
to my ears with aoTuV encodings. My own limits are close to be reached."
guruboolez

"Vorbis: Vorbis is now impressive. Last year constant noise boost or coarseness
spoiled the performance of this format. I was surprised to hear those problems
on –q6,00 setting supposed to be free of them due to lossless coupling. Aoyumi has
apparently identifies precisely the cause of this problem and he worked to solve it.
Not entirely though: some remaining trails are still audible with few samples but
the intensity is now really frail (at least on the tested samples). Other artifacts
are also corrected: micro-attacks on Orion_II (sample 09) are now much less dusty
(aoTuV performed even better than any other tested format at this bitrate!). Performance
are remarkable and the slightly gain in bitrate consumption is the icing on the cake.
Just a question: Does aoTuV mean Tuned for Victory? Or Tuned by Visitors? From what
planet is Aoyumi coming from? By the way, I wouldn’t say anymore than Vorbis is not
mature enough. At least not for classical, which appeared to be a weak point for this format"
guruboolez

== Optimized Ogg Vorbis Encoders ==
These encoders are highly optimized encoders developed by the Ogg Vorbis Acceleration Project that are much faster than the standard builds with negligible to no effects on audio quality.
* [http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index.htm Home page (Japan)]
* [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fhomepage3.nifty.com%2Fblacksword%2Findex.htm&langpair=ja%7Cen&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Home Page (google traduction)]
* [http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index_e.htm Home Page (English, not up to date)]

== Vorbis-Java ==
[http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/vorbis-java/ vorbis-java] is a native Java port of the Vorbis encoding library. It currently only supports 2 channel, 44100 hz audio input and only outputs .ogg files encoded at Variable Bit Rate. 
vorbis-java is currently a '''beta''' release ported from libogg-1.1.3, libvorbis-1.1.2 and a very infant port of libshout-2.2.2 for streaming. 

==FFVorbis==
[http://www.ffmpeg.org/ FFmpeg] contains an independent Vorbis encoder implementation (see [http://www.ffmpeg.org/general.html#SEC7 FFmpeg audio codecs], often called FFVorbis), but it's [http://xiphmont.livejournal.com/51160.html considered broken]. So, unless you have a special reason to use it, make sure to use the ffmpeg command line option '''-acodec libvorbis''' (= Xiph Libvorbis) when encoding, rather than -acodec vorbis (= FFVorbis) which is also often the default one.

[[Category:Vorbis]]

Vorbis Encoders

2014-12-11T13:18:53Z

TimSmall: /* AoTuV */ Add "soundexpert.org" listening test results.

== Vorbis-OptSort ==
[http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon/6809/vorbis-optsort-en.html Vorbis-OptSort] improves source code of the Vorbis codec library (libvorbis-1.2.0) to accelerate encoding time about 10%.

== AoTuV ==
[http://www.geocities.jp/aoyoume/aotuv/ aoTuV encoders] are optimized encoders for higher quality.
* The latest release is aoTuV beta6.03 (May 2014) - correct as-of December 2014.
* The latest stable release is aoTuV Release 1 (August 2006) AKA aoTuV beta 4.51, which improves quality at q < 3 (versus aoTuV beta4).
* aoTuV beta4 (June 2005) improved quality at all bitrates (versus xiph.org 1.1.2) and can also go down to 32 Kb/s (q-2). Note that this patch also include the [http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon/6809/vorbis-optsort-en.html Vorbis-OptSort] patch.
* aoTuV beta2 (April 2004) was adopted as a part of Vorbis 1.1.0 (September 2004) (quality wise all versions of official Xiph.Org libraries from 1.1.0 up to 1.2.1 are the same as aoTuV beta2).

Subjective listening test of aoTuV beta5.7 vs. libvorbis 1.2.3 (and others):

* [http://soundexpert.org/encoders-80-kbps soundexpert.org Encoders 80 kbit/s] - at the time of writing (December 2014), aoTuV has a slightly better average score, but its worse-case performance is slightly behind that of libvorbis

Quality test of aoTuV beta4 vs. libvorbis 1.1.1:

* [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=35438 80Kbps comparison of many audio codec and libvorbis 1.1.1 vs. aoTuV beta4]
** libvorbis 1.1.1 ABR vs libvorbis 1.1.1 VBR vs aoTuV beta4 VBR summary:
:: http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.07/80/80TEST_PLOTS_04.png

" on group1, all encoders are tied (although aoTuV is better than 1.1.1
with 90% confidence). It’s a disappointment for me, because I’ve seriously
expected from aoTuV to reduce the level of coarseness/fatness on this specific
musical genre. However, slight improvements were often perceptible – it’s
better than nothing. With some samples, a slight regression was also perceptible:
additional distortion or apparently restrictive lowpass (noticed with harpsichord).
Interesting to note that ABR doesn’t perform badly, except on critical samples
(bitrate stayed at ~85 kbps when VBR encodings reached 160!); ABR also sounded a
bit better with some samples (tonal one). Good point to ABR (just note that encoding
speed is dramatically slow compared to VBR).
on group 2, differences are much more defined. ABR appeared as clearly worse than
VBR and aoTuV beta 4 outdid 1.1.1 on VBR mode. Obviously, the changes Aoyumi made on
vorbis are much more effective on various music.
on average, aoTuV beta 4 was better than 1.1.1 (not a surprise I would say)."

"Vorbis (aoTuV beta 4, VBR –q 0,9): this is by far the most
enjoying thing I’ve heard at this bitrate. I was highly surprised
by results I’ve got with the 150 classical samples; I was literally
astonished by the final score obtained with the 35 remaining samples!
Vorbis is obviously an amazing tool at this bitrate." guruboolez

* [http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/VideoSon/MP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm 96Kbps comparison of many audio codec and libvorbis 1.1.1 vs. aoTuV beta4 (french)]
** [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.hardware.fr%2Fhardwarefr%2FVideoSon%2FMP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Google traduction]
** libvorbis 1.1.1 vs aoTuV beta4 summary:
:: http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.07/96/96TEST_PLOTS_04.png
* [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=36465 180Kbps comparison of many audio codec on classical music]
: Comment on AoTuV beta 4:
"Vorbis: Vorbis is now –thanks to Aoyumi– an excellent audio format for 180
kbps encodings (and classical music). It has apparently no flaws (lowest note
was 3.5) but only minor problems audible from time to time: additional noise,
fatness, or softened details. One third of the tested samples are transparent
to my ears with aoTuV encodings. My own limits are close to be reached."
guruboolez

"Vorbis: Vorbis is now impressive. Last year constant noise boost or coarseness
spoiled the performance of this format. I was surprised to hear those problems
on –q6,00 setting supposed to be free of them due to lossless coupling. Aoyumi has
apparently identifies precisely the cause of this problem and he worked to solve it.
Not entirely though: some remaining trails are still audible with few samples but
the intensity is now really frail (at least on the tested samples). Other artifacts
are also corrected: micro-attacks on Orion_II (sample 09) are now much less dusty
(aoTuV performed even better than any other tested format at this bitrate!). Performance
are remarkable and the slightly gain in bitrate consumption is the icing on the cake.
Just a question: Does aoTuV mean Tuned for Victory? Or Tuned by Visitors? From what
planet is Aoyumi coming from? By the way, I wouldn’t say anymore than Vorbis is not
mature enough. At least not for classical, which appeared to be a weak point for this format"
guruboolez

== Optimized Ogg Vorbis Encoders ==
These encoders are highly optimized encoders developed by the Ogg Vorbis Acceleration Project that are much faster than the standard builds with negligible to no effects on audio quality.
* [http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index.htm Home page (Japan)]
* [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fhomepage3.nifty.com%2Fblacksword%2Findex.htm&langpair=ja%7Cen&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Home Page (google traduction)]
* [http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index_e.htm Home Page (English, not up to date)]

== Vorbis-Java ==
[http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/vorbis-java/ vorbis-java] is a native Java port of the Vorbis encoding library. It currently only supports 2 channel, 44100 hz audio input and only outputs .ogg files encoded at Variable Bit Rate. 
vorbis-java is currently a '''beta''' release ported from libogg-1.1.3, libvorbis-1.1.2 and a very infant port of libshout-2.2.2 for streaming. 

==FFVorbis==
[http://www.ffmpeg.org/ FFmpeg] contains an independent Vorbis encoder implementation (see [http://www.ffmpeg.org/general.html#SEC7 FFmpeg audio codecs], often called FFVorbis), but it's [http://xiphmont.livejournal.com/51160.html considered broken]. So, unless you have a special reason to use it, make sure to use the ffmpeg command line option '''-acodec libvorbis''' (= Xiph Libvorbis) when encoding, rather than -acodec vorbis (= FFVorbis) which is also often the default one.

[[Category:Vorbis]]

Vorbis Encoders

2014-12-11T12:59:35Z

TimSmall: /* AoTuV */ edit beta2 bullet point for clarity, add date for Vorbis release

== Vorbis-OptSort ==
[http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon/6809/vorbis-optsort-en.html Vorbis-OptSort] improves source code of the Vorbis codec library (libvorbis-1.2.0) to accelerate encoding time about 10%.

== AoTuV ==
[http://www.geocities.jp/aoyoume/aotuv/ aoTuV encoders] are optimized encoders for higher quality.
* The latest release is aoTuV beta6.03 (May 2014) - correct as-of December 2014.
* The latest stable release is aoTuV Release 1 (August 2006) AKA aoTuV beta 4.51, which improves quality at q < 3 (versus aoTuV beta4).
* aoTuV beta4 (June 2005) improved quality at all bitrates (versus xiph.org 1.1.2) and can also go down to 32 Kb/s (q-2). Note that this patch also include the [http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon/6809/vorbis-optsort-en.html Vorbis-OptSort] patch.
* aoTuV beta2 (April 2004) was adopted as a part of Vorbis 1.1.0 (September 2004) (quality wise all versions of official Xiph.Org libraries from 1.1.0 up to 1.2.1 are the same as aoTuV beta2).

Quality test of aoTuV beta4 vs. libvorbis 1.1.1:
* [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=35438 80Kbps comparison of many audio codec and libvorbis 1.1.1 vs. aoTuV beta4]
** libvorbis 1.1.1 ABR vs libvorbis 1.1.1 VBR vs aoTuV beta4 VBR summary:
:: http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.07/80/80TEST_PLOTS_04.png

" on group1, all encoders are tied (although aoTuV is better than 1.1.1
with 90% confidence). It’s a disappointment for me, because I’ve seriously
expected from aoTuV to reduce the level of coarseness/fatness on this specific
musical genre. However, slight improvements were often perceptible – it’s
better than nothing. With some samples, a slight regression was also perceptible:
additional distortion or apparently restrictive lowpass (noticed with harpsichord).
Interesting to note that ABR doesn’t perform badly, except on critical samples
(bitrate stayed at ~85 kbps when VBR encodings reached 160!); ABR also sounded a
bit better with some samples (tonal one). Good point to ABR (just note that encoding
speed is dramatically slow compared to VBR).
on group 2, differences are much more defined. ABR appeared as clearly worse than
VBR and aoTuV beta 4 outdid 1.1.1 on VBR mode. Obviously, the changes Aoyumi made on
vorbis are much more effective on various music.
on average, aoTuV beta 4 was better than 1.1.1 (not a surprise I would say)."

"Vorbis (aoTuV beta 4, VBR –q 0,9): this is by far the most
enjoying thing I’ve heard at this bitrate. I was highly surprised
by results I’ve got with the 150 classical samples; I was literally
astonished by the final score obtained with the 35 remaining samples!
Vorbis is obviously an amazing tool at this bitrate." guruboolez

* [http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/VideoSon/MP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm 96Kbps comparison of many audio codec and libvorbis 1.1.1 vs. aoTuV beta4 (french)]
** [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.hardware.fr%2Fhardwarefr%2FVideoSon%2FMP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Google traduction]
** libvorbis 1.1.1 vs aoTuV beta4 summary:
:: http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.07/96/96TEST_PLOTS_04.png
* [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=36465 180Kbps comparison of many audio codec on classical music]
: Comment on AoTuV beta 4:
"Vorbis: Vorbis is now –thanks to Aoyumi– an excellent audio format for 180
kbps encodings (and classical music). It has apparently no flaws (lowest note
was 3.5) but only minor problems audible from time to time: additional noise,
fatness, or softened details. One third of the tested samples are transparent
to my ears with aoTuV encodings. My own limits are close to be reached."
guruboolez

"Vorbis: Vorbis is now impressive. Last year constant noise boost or coarseness
spoiled the performance of this format. I was surprised to hear those problems
on –q6,00 setting supposed to be free of them due to lossless coupling. Aoyumi has
apparently identifies precisely the cause of this problem and he worked to solve it.
Not entirely though: some remaining trails are still audible with few samples but
the intensity is now really frail (at least on the tested samples). Other artifacts
are also corrected: micro-attacks on Orion_II (sample 09) are now much less dusty
(aoTuV performed even better than any other tested format at this bitrate!). Performance
are remarkable and the slightly gain in bitrate consumption is the icing on the cake.
Just a question: Does aoTuV mean Tuned for Victory? Or Tuned by Visitors? From what
planet is Aoyumi coming from? By the way, I wouldn’t say anymore than Vorbis is not
mature enough. At least not for classical, which appeared to be a weak point for this format"
guruboolez

== Optimized Ogg Vorbis Encoders ==
These encoders are highly optimized encoders developed by the Ogg Vorbis Acceleration Project that are much faster than the standard builds with negligible to no effects on audio quality.
* [http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index.htm Home page (Japan)]
* [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fhomepage3.nifty.com%2Fblacksword%2Findex.htm&langpair=ja%7Cen&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Home Page (google traduction)]
* [http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index_e.htm Home Page (English, not up to date)]

== Vorbis-Java ==
[http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/vorbis-java/ vorbis-java] is a native Java port of the Vorbis encoding library. It currently only supports 2 channel, 44100 hz audio input and only outputs .ogg files encoded at Variable Bit Rate. 
vorbis-java is currently a '''beta''' release ported from libogg-1.1.3, libvorbis-1.1.2 and a very infant port of libshout-2.2.2 for streaming. 

==FFVorbis==
[http://www.ffmpeg.org/ FFmpeg] contains an independent Vorbis encoder implementation (see [http://www.ffmpeg.org/general.html#SEC7 FFmpeg audio codecs], often called FFVorbis), but it's [http://xiphmont.livejournal.com/51160.html considered broken]. So, unless you have a special reason to use it, make sure to use the ffmpeg command line option '''-acodec libvorbis''' (= Xiph Libvorbis) when encoding, rather than -acodec vorbis (= FFVorbis) which is also often the default one.

[[Category:Vorbis]]

Vorbis Encoders

2014-12-11T12:47:36Z

TimSmall: /* AoTuV */ Re-order bullet-points into chronological order of version, for clarify.

== Vorbis-OptSort ==
[http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon/6809/vorbis-optsort-en.html Vorbis-OptSort] improves source code of the Vorbis codec library (libvorbis-1.2.0) to accelerate encoding time about 10%.

== AoTuV ==
[http://www.geocities.jp/aoyoume/aotuv/ aoTuV encoders] are optimized encoders for higher quality.
* The latest release is aoTuV beta6.03 (2014-5-11) - correct as-of 2014-12.
* The latest stable release is aoTuV Release 1 (AKA aoTuV beta 4.51), which improves quality at q < 3 (versus aoTuV beta4).
* aoTuV beta4 improved quality at all bitrates (versus xiph.org 1.1.2) and can also go down to 32 Kb/s (q-2). Note that this patch also include the [http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon/6809/vorbis-optsort-en.html Vorbis-OptSort] patch.
* aoTuV beta2 was adopted as a part of Vorbis 1.1 of Xiph.Org (quality wise all versions of official libraries from 1.1 up to 1.2.1 are the same of aoTuV beta2).

Quality test of aoTuV beta4 vs. libvorbis 1.1.1:
* [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=35438 80Kbps comparison of many audio codec and libvorbis 1.1.1 vs. aoTuV beta4]
** libvorbis 1.1.1 ABR vs libvorbis 1.1.1 VBR vs aoTuV beta4 VBR summary:
:: http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.07/80/80TEST_PLOTS_04.png

" on group1, all encoders are tied (although aoTuV is better than 1.1.1
with 90% confidence). It’s a disappointment for me, because I’ve seriously
expected from aoTuV to reduce the level of coarseness/fatness on this specific
musical genre. However, slight improvements were often perceptible – it’s
better than nothing. With some samples, a slight regression was also perceptible:
additional distortion or apparently restrictive lowpass (noticed with harpsichord).
Interesting to note that ABR doesn’t perform badly, except on critical samples
(bitrate stayed at ~85 kbps when VBR encodings reached 160!); ABR also sounded a
bit better with some samples (tonal one). Good point to ABR (just note that encoding
speed is dramatically slow compared to VBR).
on group 2, differences are much more defined. ABR appeared as clearly worse than
VBR and aoTuV beta 4 outdid 1.1.1 on VBR mode. Obviously, the changes Aoyumi made on
vorbis are much more effective on various music.
on average, aoTuV beta 4 was better than 1.1.1 (not a surprise I would say)."

"Vorbis (aoTuV beta 4, VBR –q 0,9): this is by far the most
enjoying thing I’ve heard at this bitrate. I was highly surprised
by results I’ve got with the 150 classical samples; I was literally
astonished by the final score obtained with the 35 remaining samples!
Vorbis is obviously an amazing tool at this bitrate." guruboolez

* [http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/VideoSon/MP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm 96Kbps comparison of many audio codec and libvorbis 1.1.1 vs. aoTuV beta4 (french)]
** [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.hardware.fr%2Fhardwarefr%2FVideoSon%2FMP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Google traduction]
** libvorbis 1.1.1 vs aoTuV beta4 summary:
:: http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.07/96/96TEST_PLOTS_04.png
* [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=36465 180Kbps comparison of many audio codec on classical music]
: Comment on AoTuV beta 4:
"Vorbis: Vorbis is now –thanks to Aoyumi– an excellent audio format for 180
kbps encodings (and classical music). It has apparently no flaws (lowest note
was 3.5) but only minor problems audible from time to time: additional noise,
fatness, or softened details. One third of the tested samples are transparent
to my ears with aoTuV encodings. My own limits are close to be reached."
guruboolez

"Vorbis: Vorbis is now impressive. Last year constant noise boost or coarseness
spoiled the performance of this format. I was surprised to hear those problems
on –q6,00 setting supposed to be free of them due to lossless coupling. Aoyumi has
apparently identifies precisely the cause of this problem and he worked to solve it.
Not entirely though: some remaining trails are still audible with few samples but
the intensity is now really frail (at least on the tested samples). Other artifacts
are also corrected: micro-attacks on Orion_II (sample 09) are now much less dusty
(aoTuV performed even better than any other tested format at this bitrate!). Performance
are remarkable and the slightly gain in bitrate consumption is the icing on the cake.
Just a question: Does aoTuV mean Tuned for Victory? Or Tuned by Visitors? From what
planet is Aoyumi coming from? By the way, I wouldn’t say anymore than Vorbis is not
mature enough. At least not for classical, which appeared to be a weak point for this format"
guruboolez

== Optimized Ogg Vorbis Encoders ==
These encoders are highly optimized encoders developed by the Ogg Vorbis Acceleration Project that are much faster than the standard builds with negligible to no effects on audio quality.
* [http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index.htm Home page (Japan)]
* [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fhomepage3.nifty.com%2Fblacksword%2Findex.htm&langpair=ja%7Cen&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Home Page (google traduction)]
* [http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index_e.htm Home Page (English, not up to date)]

== Vorbis-Java ==
[http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/vorbis-java/ vorbis-java] is a native Java port of the Vorbis encoding library. It currently only supports 2 channel, 44100 hz audio input and only outputs .ogg files encoded at Variable Bit Rate. 
vorbis-java is currently a '''beta''' release ported from libogg-1.1.3, libvorbis-1.1.2 and a very infant port of libshout-2.2.2 for streaming. 

==FFVorbis==
[http://www.ffmpeg.org/ FFmpeg] contains an independent Vorbis encoder implementation (see [http://www.ffmpeg.org/general.html#SEC7 FFmpeg audio codecs], often called FFVorbis), but it's [http://xiphmont.livejournal.com/51160.html considered broken]. So, unless you have a special reason to use it, make sure to use the ffmpeg command line option '''-acodec libvorbis''' (= Xiph Libvorbis) when encoding, rather than -acodec vorbis (= FFVorbis) which is also often the default one.

[[Category:Vorbis]]

Vorbis Encoders

2014-12-11T12:40:46Z

TimSmall: /* AoTuV */ Update latest release for aoTuV, and add date

== Vorbis-OptSort ==
[http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon/6809/vorbis-optsort-en.html Vorbis-OptSort] improves source code of the Vorbis codec library (libvorbis-1.2.0) to accelerate encoding time about 10%.

== AoTuV ==
[http://www.geocities.jp/aoyoume/aotuv/ aoTuV encoders] are optimized encoders for higher quality.
* aoTuV beta2 was adopted as a part of Vorbis 1.1 of Xiph.Org (quality wise all versions of official libraries from 1.1 up to 1.2.1 are the same of aoTuV beta2).
* aoTuV beta4 improved quality at all bitrates (versus xiph.org 1.1.2) and can also go down to 32 Kb/s (q-2). Note that this patch also include the [http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Dungeon/6809/vorbis-optsort-en.html Vorbis-OptSort] patch.
* The latest release is aoTuV beta6.03 (2014-5-11) - correct as-of 2014-12.
* The latest stable release is Release 1 (AKA aoTuV beta 4.51), which improves quality at q < 3 (versus aoTuV beta4).
Quality test of aoTuV beta4 vs. libvorbis 1.1.1:
* [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=35438 80Kbps comparison of many audio codec and libvorbis 1.1.1 vs. aoTuV beta4]
** libvorbis 1.1.1 ABR vs libvorbis 1.1.1 VBR vs aoTuV beta4 VBR summary:
:: http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.07/80/80TEST_PLOTS_04.png

" on group1, all encoders are tied (although aoTuV is better than 1.1.1
with 90% confidence). It’s a disappointment for me, because I’ve seriously
expected from aoTuV to reduce the level of coarseness/fatness on this specific
musical genre. However, slight improvements were often perceptible – it’s
better than nothing. With some samples, a slight regression was also perceptible:
additional distortion or apparently restrictive lowpass (noticed with harpsichord).
Interesting to note that ABR doesn’t perform badly, except on critical samples
(bitrate stayed at ~85 kbps when VBR encodings reached 160!); ABR also sounded a
bit better with some samples (tonal one). Good point to ABR (just note that encoding
speed is dramatically slow compared to VBR).
on group 2, differences are much more defined. ABR appeared as clearly worse than
VBR and aoTuV beta 4 outdid 1.1.1 on VBR mode. Obviously, the changes Aoyumi made on
vorbis are much more effective on various music.
on average, aoTuV beta 4 was better than 1.1.1 (not a surprise I would say)."

"Vorbis (aoTuV beta 4, VBR –q 0,9): this is by far the most
enjoying thing I’ve heard at this bitrate. I was highly surprised
by results I’ve got with the 150 classical samples; I was literally
astonished by the final score obtained with the 35 remaining samples!
Vorbis is obviously an amazing tool at this bitrate." guruboolez

* [http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/VideoSon/MP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm 96Kbps comparison of many audio codec and libvorbis 1.1.1 vs. aoTuV beta4 (french)]
** [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fforum.hardware.fr%2Fhardwarefr%2FVideoSon%2FMP3-WMA-AAC-OGG-qualite-kbps-evaluation-sujet-84950-1.htm&langpair=fr%7Cen&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Google traduction]
** libvorbis 1.1.1 vs aoTuV beta4 summary:
:: http://audiotests.free.fr/tests/2005.07/96/96TEST_PLOTS_04.png
* [http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=36465 180Kbps comparison of many audio codec on classical music]
: Comment on AoTuV beta 4:
"Vorbis: Vorbis is now –thanks to Aoyumi– an excellent audio format for 180
kbps encodings (and classical music). It has apparently no flaws (lowest note
was 3.5) but only minor problems audible from time to time: additional noise,
fatness, or softened details. One third of the tested samples are transparent
to my ears with aoTuV encodings. My own limits are close to be reached."
guruboolez

"Vorbis: Vorbis is now impressive. Last year constant noise boost or coarseness
spoiled the performance of this format. I was surprised to hear those problems
on –q6,00 setting supposed to be free of them due to lossless coupling. Aoyumi has
apparently identifies precisely the cause of this problem and he worked to solve it.
Not entirely though: some remaining trails are still audible with few samples but
the intensity is now really frail (at least on the tested samples). Other artifacts
are also corrected: micro-attacks on Orion_II (sample 09) are now much less dusty
(aoTuV performed even better than any other tested format at this bitrate!). Performance
are remarkable and the slightly gain in bitrate consumption is the icing on the cake.
Just a question: Does aoTuV mean Tuned for Victory? Or Tuned by Visitors? From what
planet is Aoyumi coming from? By the way, I wouldn’t say anymore than Vorbis is not
mature enough. At least not for classical, which appeared to be a weak point for this format"
guruboolez

== Optimized Ogg Vorbis Encoders ==
These encoders are highly optimized encoders developed by the Ogg Vorbis Acceleration Project that are much faster than the standard builds with negligible to no effects on audio quality.
* [http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index.htm Home page (Japan)]
* [http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fhomepage3.nifty.com%2Fblacksword%2Findex.htm&langpair=ja%7Cen&hl=it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=%2Flanguage_tools Home Page (google traduction)]
* [http://homepage3.nifty.com/blacksword/index_e.htm Home Page (English, not up to date)]

== Vorbis-Java ==
[http://downloads.xiph.org/releases/vorbis-java/ vorbis-java] is a native Java port of the Vorbis encoding library. It currently only supports 2 channel, 44100 hz audio input and only outputs .ogg files encoded at Variable Bit Rate. 
vorbis-java is currently a '''beta''' release ported from libogg-1.1.3, libvorbis-1.1.2 and a very infant port of libshout-2.2.2 for streaming. 

==FFVorbis==
[http://www.ffmpeg.org/ FFmpeg] contains an independent Vorbis encoder implementation (see [http://www.ffmpeg.org/general.html#SEC7 FFmpeg audio codecs], often called FFVorbis), but it's [http://xiphmont.livejournal.com/51160.html considered broken]. So, unless you have a special reason to use it, make sure to use the ffmpeg command line option '''-acodec libvorbis''' (= Xiph Libvorbis) when encoding, rather than -acodec vorbis (= FFVorbis) which is also often the default one.

[[Category:Vorbis]]