MP3 or OGG?
I have no idea what the answer to your question is, but it occurs to me that the person who can best answer it is you yourself.
Download both Ogg and MP3 versions and see which you like better. Why do you like one better than the other? Is that true for every MP3 vs Ogg pair you try? If so, you've learnt something useful to you, and nobody can tell you that you've got it wrong. They might tell you that there was something you hadn't considered, but until they provide you with MP3 and Ogg samples that illustrate the difference, it won't matter to you. In fact, quite the reverse: you will already know that in all the cases that are important to you the choice you will have made will have been the right one.
If this sounds like the scientific method, that's because it is.
Download both Ogg and MP3 versions and see which you like better. Why do you like one better than the other? Is that true for every MP3 vs Ogg pair you try? If so, you've learnt something useful to you, and nobody can tell you that you've got it wrong. They might tell you that there was something you hadn't considered, but until they provide you with MP3 and Ogg samples that illustrate the difference, it won't matter to you. In fact, quite the reverse: you will already know that in all the cases that are important to you the choice you will have made will have been the right one.
If this sounds like the scientific method, that's because it is.
At the Wikipedia, see Comparison of audio codecs and Codec listening test.
I get my complied binary of LAME from the JT HZ Web site. They are
members of the Audio Engineering Society and have a page titled
Creating quality audio-files using Windows, L.A.M.E., Ogg Vorbis.
I get my complied binary of LAME from the JT HZ Web site. They are
members of the Audio Engineering Society and have a page titled
Creating quality audio-files using Windows, L.A.M.E., Ogg Vorbis.
I wonder how the OGG files for LibriVox recordings are actually created. Since contributors are supposed to upload 128 kps MP3 files (in most cases?), I can only surmise that the OGG files are created by decoding the MP3 files and then encoding them as OGG Vorbis again.
Is this correct? If this were the case, the quality of the OGG files, though the format in theory allows better quality at the same bitrate as MP3, would actually be inferior to the 128 kps MP3 files and I don't really see the reason for having them.
Can somebody more knowledgeable about the LibiriVox publication process perhaps shed some light onto this?
Chris
Is this correct? If this were the case, the quality of the OGG files, though the format in theory allows better quality at the same bitrate as MP3, would actually be inferior to the 128 kps MP3 files and I don't really see the reason for having them.
Can somebody more knowledgeable about the LibiriVox publication process perhaps shed some light onto this?
Chris
The Internet Archive (where the finished files are stored) will automatically create the ogg, 64 bit MP3 and streaming files when you upload a 128 bit mp3.
Boomcoach
My Catalog Page
My current Solo project A Spoiler of Men by Richard Marsh
One role needed to complete the Dramatic Reading of The Leader by Murray Leinster, help us finish this project!
My Catalog Page
My current Solo project A Spoiler of Men by Richard Marsh
One role needed to complete the Dramatic Reading of The Leader by Murray Leinster, help us finish this project!
Ok, thanks for the info. Seems a sub-optimal process to me. But the only solution would be to allow upload of lossless encoded files like WAV or FLAC and create the MP3 and OGG files from them. And that would mean increasing the storage requirements at least sevenfold.
Keeping in mind that we're talking about pure voice recordings (usually) produced on non-professional equipment in (usually) non-studio environments. The difference between ogg and MP3, even with a few derivations one way or the other, is inconsequential.
In my opinion, if you have an ogg device that you're happy with, then ogg is fine. Likewise, if you have an MP3 device you're happy with that's ok, too.
Jim
In my opinion, if you have an ogg device that you're happy with, then ogg is fine. Likewise, if you have an MP3 device you're happy with that's ok, too.
Jim
In theory, if the original material is encoded with comparable settings to either MP3 or OGG, the quality shouldn't differ much (although the OGG file should be slightly smaller at the same nominal bitrate). But in practice, I noticed that the OGG files at LibriVox have very often much lower nominal bitrates than the MP3 files at 128 kps. I have observed nominal bitrates at 80 and 112 kps. While the latter might be comparable to MP3, the former is definitely not, even for speech-only recordings. This sheds a bad light on an otherwise superior format, IMHO.Steampunk wrote:Keeping in mind that we're talking about pure voice recordings (usually) produced on non-professional equipment in (usually) non-studio environments. The difference between ogg and MP3, even with a few derivations one way or the other, is inconsequential.
I can't check all the files, but I wonder, what is the standard for encoding the OGG files (i.e. bitrate, qulity setting, etc.) and if this can be influenced in any ways by the uploader? Or is it possible by a contributor/reader to provide his/her own OGG file, which was encoded from the original recording?
Chris
-
- LibriVox Admin Team
- Posts: 14190
- Joined: January 16th, 2007, 9:23 am
- Contact:
Archive.org (where our cataloged files are hosted) does all the file derivations, including the OGGs. They require that we send them 128 kbps mp3's, then they take care of the rest. So this would be a question to ask them.strogon14 wrote:I wonder, what is the standard for encoding the OGG files (i.e. bitrate, qulity setting, etc.) and if this can be influenced in any ways by the uploader? Or is it possible by a contributor/reader to provide his/her own OGG file, which was encoded from the original recording
Laurie Anne
Here's a different view, from members of the Audio Engineering Societystrogon14 wrote:In theory, if the original material is encoded with comparable settings
to either MP3 or OGG, the quality shouldn't differ much.
(see my post above):
Ogg Vorbis is more efficient than MP3 and is the state of the art
in audio compression technology. Used properly, recent Ogg Vorbis
encoders deliver sound quality surpassing MP3 with all possible
bitrates.
Well, if you read my posts carefully, I always said, that OGG is superior. With "comparable settings" I meant settings, that yield the same results. To put your quote another way, the same quality can be achieved through the use of OGG Vorbis compression at lower bitrates (and therefore yielding smaller files) than with MP3 encoding.
BUT, this will only be the case, if the OGG file is created from the ORIGINAL uncompressed recording (be it in WAV, AIFF or any other lossless format), NOT from an already lossy-encoded MP3!.
Chris
BUT, this will only be the case, if the OGG file is created from the ORIGINAL uncompressed recording (be it in WAV, AIFF or any other lossless format), NOT from an already lossy-encoded MP3!.
Chris
In an ideal world etc etc... we would, I am sure, love all our recordings to be lossless. However, we are dependent for our file hosting on the Internet Archive, which demands 128 kbps files. We also have to store all our 'works in progress' on our own server, which does not have limitless space, and each of us has limited time (and probably limited bandwidth) to upload our recordings.strogon14 wrote:BUT, this will only be the case, if the OGG file is created from the ORIGINAL uncompressed recording (be it in WAV, AIFF or any other lossless format), NOT from an already lossy-encoded MP3!.
So it's not an ideal world and everything seems to work pretty well, considering.
Ruth
My LV catalogue page | RuthieG's CataBlog of recordings | Tweet: @RuthGolding
.wav or .flac are sometimes requested in dramatic works projects where the individual files are to be edited together to make the whole production. The final file will be uploaded as usual as an MP3.
Ruth
Ruth
My LV catalogue page | RuthieG's CataBlog of recordings | Tweet: @RuthGolding
-
- LibriVox Admin Team
- Posts: 7972
- Joined: September 26th, 2005, 4:14 am
- Location: Montreal, QC
- Contact:
the other advantage of ogg vorbis is that it's an open, patent-free codec.
whereas there is a patent on mp3, and, in theory, the owner could start charging licensing fees to anyone using mp3 to distribute content. unlikely, of course, but impossible with ogg vorbis.
whereas there is a patent on mp3, and, in theory, the owner could start charging licensing fees to anyone using mp3 to distribute content. unlikely, of course, but impossible with ogg vorbis.