Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[odnorf]

...or the engine users would have to pay (less expensive)...

I remember people talking about this at Sludge forums and I believe that it's NOT much more "less expensive" (althought I can't remember the exact prices).

[KA-su-MA-kun]

Never claimed to know everything. But most people ditched MOD and MIDI in favour of MP3, not caring about the licensing details.

If I could remember the URL I'd give you the one for all the Amiga source code that became public domain, like I said MOD was AFAIK originally a Amiga file format, before some intelligent human being ported it to the DOS platform.

[odnorf]

But most people ditched MOD and MIDI in favour of MP3, not caring about the licensing details.

That's why Mnemonic made the smartest move and support only (so far) Ogg vorbis (and someday speex) which is patent-free & opensource under a BSD-like licence  

And if *I* had to choose beetween MOD & MP3 for a game, I would have chosen MOD, because AFAIK it's legal whether MP3 is NOT.

[Mnemonic]

...and sounds better


EDIT: (Vorbis, I mean, not MOD)

[odnorf]

...and sounds better

EDIT: (Vorbis, I mean, not MOD)

You know how much I love Ogg Vorbis for it's licence, but this statement has yet to be prooven. At bitrates lower than 128 it has been prooven with blind listening tests to be much better than all mp3 encoders. At bitrates above 160 (in the search for transperancy) we still don't have prooves. Actually it seems that it's a matter of taste. Some people like better "lame -alt-preset standard" and some other like more "oggenc -q6" (both lines have a nominal bitrate of 192).

A usufull & interesting test that is being condacted now can be found at http://audio.ciara.us/test/128extension/presentation.html

EDIT: I personally prefer Ogg Vorbis over MP3 not only for it's licence but also for it's quality. Anyone interested in encoding with oggenc at -q5 or above should use this encoder http://64.246.62.80/~hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?showtopic=6023&st=0&#entry60471
It's much better tuned, especially in noise issues and preecho. But keep in mind that for the quality switches -q5 has bigger nominal bitrates, so if you were use -q6 for example you could try -5.5
(The link I provided might not work in a few days due to server changes. But you could still do a search for GT3b1 at www.hydrogenaudio.org)

[KA-su-MA-kun]

People have a bad habit of ditching the old for the new, even if there is no actual improvement, look at how many people snapped up copies of Windows ME when it first came out, when it is still the common opinion now that of the 9x operating systems Windows 98SE is still the best.

I personally don't know anything about OGG vs MP3, or even the OGG format. If it had been something like the DivX - MPeG4 - OGM debate, I think I would keep my mouth shut and stick with my own thoughts (I used to be part of an encoding group that uses OGM, involved with subtitling so some of the OGM features appeal to me enough to be willing to advocate it).

[odnorf]

Well.... I think I should improve my english because I don't really got the meaning of what you are trying to say But anyway I'll try to answer. If I respond something irrelevant to what you are trying to say please forgive me.

People have a bad habit of ditching the old for the new, even if there is no actual improvement, look at how many people snapped up copies of Windows ME when it first came out, when it is still the common opinion now that of the 9x operating systems Windows 98SE is still the best.

If assume (usually a bad think to do ) you are talking about the "MP3 or Ogg Vorbis" discussions here. Well, first of all, there is no ditching. I said that Ogg Vorbis is a much better tool because it has a much better licence and ALSO quality comparable to MP3. So it seems obvious that Ogg Vorbis is a better overral choice for an adventure game.

EDIT: And if you refering to "MOD or MP3" discussion then I have already said that MOD is a better choice due to licence issues with MP3. But overal they are not really comparable as they are completely different formats made for different pursposes.

I personally don't know anything about OGG vs MP3, or even the OGG format. If it had been something like the DivX - MPeG4 - OGM debate, I think I would keep my mouth shut and stick with my own thoughts (I used to be part of an encoding group that uses OGM, involved with subtitling so some of the OGM features appeal to me enough to be willing to advocate it).

I don't understand why anyone can't say that x is better than y when he had some points to make and proove his claims. ?!?!?
And you confused me even more because you speek for DivX and Ogm as competitors when they are not. Divx is a codec while Ogm is a video/audio container (basically Ogm is the same as Ogg with some additions that were always in the Ogg specs but never programmed before).

Even more, I actually didn't advocate Ogg Vorbis because I said that it may have worse quality than MP3 at bitrates of 160 or higher.

Oh... and a really unimportand thing for me, but important for xiph.org is the names. It's not OGG & OGM but Ogg & Ogm (I am not saying this myself, xiph.org has requested it from anyone because it doesn't pronounced OGG but o-g-g, one letter at the time).

[KA-su-MA-kun]

No you just don't understand me, but that is ok not many people ever have or will.

OGG is more correct as a pronunciation aid, since Ogg looks like it's intended to be a word, not an acronym, so are you certain they got it around the right way, I'm trying to find a reference to such an issue on their site now.

Regarding the ditching I was talking about people abandoning the older formats in favour of newer formats without ever looking back and considering where such a format would be more suitable to the needs they had.

[odnorf]

No you just don't understand me, but that is ok not many people ever have or will.

Hehe! I think the problem here is called "native english & not-native english speakers"

OGG is more correct as a pronunciation aid, since Ogg looks like it's intended to be a word, not an acronym, so are you certain they got it around the right way, I'm trying to find a reference to such an issue on their site now.

OK... I just make a fool out of myself because I just remembered that the correct way to pronnounce it is "og" and not "o-gee-gee" and that' because it's not an acronym and they didn't want it to sound like another mp3 (which it is 3 different words). Sorry for the inconviniance I have caused. The part about how we should write it is still correct. Actually it should be better to write "Ogg Vorbis" when we refer to a vorbis endoded file and not just Ogg because Ogg is just the container. We could also have Ogg Flac and Ogg Speex.

And this time I hope to be correct. I have read all this information at the mailing list of xiph.org and at various posts at www.hydrogenaudio.org by Emmett (ex CEO of xiph.org) and Monty (the "father" of Ogg container and Vorbis codec).

[talking to myself] Have to sleep more and drink less! [/talking to myself]

[KA-su-MA-kun]

Hardly, I'm one of those people who confuses everyone because I have a very different way of thinking. It doesn't matter what your first language is.

I *was* wondering about that like I said. Oh well no harm done, I'm just used to all the acronyms they use around computers, about the only acronym I appreciate is TWAIN (Technology Without An Interesting Name).

[odnorf]

About the Ogg vs OGG...

Here is an "Ogg traffic" from March 2003 that explains everythingl.
http://www.vorbis.com/ot/20030318.html#id2727368