Hahah! Ehem..due to the last 2 threads about ogg and mp3, i decided to make some test, and they shows some extremely interresting things.
i have used the following tools: tar, bz2, lame, oggenc
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~/sound_test$ ls -lh total 90.4M -rw-r--r-- 1 redeeman redeeman 8.3M Dec 8 12:43 the_hero-sterio-nominel-320kbps.mp3 -rw-r--r-- 1 redeeman redeeman 28M Dec 8 12:26 the_hero.flac -rw-r--r-- 1 redeeman redeeman 7.3M Dec 8 12:40 the_hero-vbr-j-sterio-320kbps.mp3 -rw-r--r-- 1 redeeman redeeman 6.4M Dec 8 12:48 the_hero.tar.bz2 -rw-r--r-- 1 redeeman redeeman 37M Dec 8 12:26 the_hero.wav -rw-r--r-- 1 redeeman redeeman 3.4M Dec 8 12:44 the_hero-sterio-nominel-120kbps.mp3 [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~/sound_test$
i must say i belive tar and bz2 is much more looseless than ogg and mp3, and it takes SO little space up, its almost fantastic, look at flac, 28mb, tar.bz2: 6.4mb. this even shows that its better to bz2 them than to compress with varible bitrate, joint sterio 320kbps mp3. the compressions time was even smaller on the bz2, so i wonder if there is going to be a bz2 plugin for xmms soon?
sorry.. but is this a bad joke or something ? =)
You've got something screwed up here.. I wonder what's inside that tarball...(?) Flac is definitely much more efficient at compressing audio data losslessly than the bzip2 algorithm.
-- < Øyvind Stegard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> < University of Oslo, Dept. of informatics < http://www.stegard.net/ < 0x2B | ~0x2B - Hamlet
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
