On Fri, 24 May 2002, Ron Clarke wrote: > > Why would anyone encode a recording to MP3 instead > > of ogg? > > Because not everyone has an OGG player,
Not everyone has an MP3 player either. ;-) > and because MP3 is a touch smaller file size than OGG. The one time I did side-by-side comparisons between a wav file encoded to both MP3 and ogg, the ogg format came out the winner. Encode the wav file to achieve equal file sizes in ogg and MP3, and the ogg file sounds better. I suppose I should qualify that to say that the ogg sounds more "analog." Anyway... that's how it worked on the TWO *wav files I experimented with. Obviously, not enough to draw any general conclusions, especially since both recordings were so similar... both containing a guitar and a voice. On top of the practical reasons though, is the fact that MP3 is proprietary while ogg is open. I *believe* that by making an MP3 recording (without paying the licensing fee), you are infringing on the MP3 patent. With ogg, you don't even have to give such nonsense a second thought. -- Steve Ackman http://twoloonscoffee.com (Need green beans?) http://twovoyagers.com (glass, linux & other stuff)
