What's up with this OGG standard? Is it better than WMA or MP3??

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

NuclearFusi0n

Diamond Member
Jul 2, 2001
7,028
0
0
A. I use Monkey's Audio for all my rips, personally.

B. Ogg Vorbis smacks the crap out of every other audio compression technology available today (MP3, WMA, ___) at low bitrates (128 and below). MPC would be a better choice for higher bitrates (200+)

C. MP3 sucks. Deal with it.
 

murphy55d

Lifer
Dec 26, 2000
11,542
5
81
I have a couple OGG files and their mp3 countparts... no difference that I can hear, though I am certainly no audiophile.
 

Confused

Elite Member
Nov 13, 2000
14,166
0
0
I can easily tell a difference between a 160kbps VBR MP3, and a 160kbps Vorbis file (happy NuclearFusi0n ;):p)

And compared to those, 128kbps CBR MP3 sounds totally crappy!


Confused
 

Derango

Diamond Member
Jan 1, 2002
3,113
1
0
OGG is actually better. It produces better sounding files at lower bitrates than MP3 does. The difference between the two formats grows even wider once you get down to the really low bitrates. a 32kbps ogg stream sounds VERY good compared to a 32kbps mp3 stream :)

Its also going to have a couple of cool features like on the fly bitrate reduction, IIRC so a ogg stream can lower its bitrate to you if your connection's not fast enough. Dunno what's going on with that though, haven't heard much about it for a while.

The one downside to ogg: Very few people use it.
 

Sunner

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
11,641
0
76
I only use OGG/Vorbis when I rip my CD's these days, it definately sounds better than mp3's at non obscene bitrates.

And as has been mentioned, it has more features, that may just come in handy in the future :)

Oh and as for burning on the fly to CD's, Ahead(makers of Nero) will be releasing documentation about how to make plugins to Nero, which will allow whoever feels like it to make a plugin to do on the fly Vorbis->CD burning.