On Sun, 2003-08-17 at 02:14, Anarky wrote: > Ralph Slooten wrote: > > >On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 08:17:05 +1200 > >Michael Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > >>Wouldn't this be accumulating losses exponentially? > >>Like 5% loss in original mp3. Convert to wav then 5% loss from wav to ogg = > >>total loss of 25%. Of course i may be blowing smoke. > >> > >> > > > > > >It depends how you look at it.... I do it all the time actually... I download > >mp3's of 192kb/s minimum, and reconvert them to quality 4 ogg format. Honestly, > >I hear no difference at all, and save about 1/2 the disk-space doing it ;-) > > > > > r u serious? ogg actually compresses better than mp3? And it's also > free? r u serious? I mean I'm totally new to this ogg stuff. And what do > you convert with? Rezound? Or is there some batch conversion tool/script. >
Yes, ogg vorbis is a better format for sound files than mp3. The sound enthusiasts/experts that created the ogg vorbis format worked especially hard to address concerns that audiophiles would have with music and other things. So yes, it does have better compression than mp3, and what's more the quality of the compression is better. Sound output from an mp3 can be stored in a much smaller space using ogg vorbis format with no loss of sound quality. The converse is also true; you can store a much *greater* amount of sound quality using ogg vorbis in the same space that a given mp3 would take up. Know what the best thing about ogg vorbis is when compared against mp3 format? It's free....with no licensing issues. LX P.S. You can use SoX for converting from mp3 to ogg. -- 같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같� Linux Mandrake 9.1 Kernel 2.4.21-0.13mdk *Catch Star Trek Enterprise, Wednesdays on UPN* 같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같같
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
