Tweet
I want to convert my mp3's to ogg's so I have smaller files and can fit more on my player. But when I try to convert, the ogg's end up being about the same size as the mp3's. I am converting from 128kbs 44100 mp3's to the same setting ogg's. From what I have read they should be a lot smaller. Shouldn't they? If so what am I doing wrong.
-
-
Re: Shouldn't Ogg be smaller than Mp3
No, as Ogg at the same bitrate as mp3 is a better encoded file. Normally, to get an ogg file at about the same quality as an mp3 file, you drop the encoding quality on the ogg file one level below the mp3 setting. This will get you approximately the same quality, but how well people discern quality differs from person to person. -
Re: Shouldn't Ogg be smaller than Mp3
I believe you are mistaken that there is a significant difference between ogg and mp3 (or, for that matter musepack, m4a/mp4/aac, or even wma) filesizes recorded at the same bitrate from the same source. I suspect that you may have read somewhere that you can fit quite a few more ogg files on a portable than you could with mp3. More commonly I have seen portable players indicate that they can store roughly x number of mp3 files or 2x wma files. The very fine print of such claims will indicate that they are, in fact, basing these predictions on assumptions as to the length of the musical tracks and also as to the bitrates at which these mp3 and wma files are encoded (128 kbs for mp3 and 64 kbs for wma). Ogg vorbis is reputed to give superior (as compared to most other codecs) at low bitrates than most other codecs (wma is the other codec that does will at low bitrates). I know we have some users who are very pleased with ogg vorbis at 64 kbs for use on their ogg vorbis-compatible portables.
I would go on to say that my own experience is that wma at 64 kbs is NOT equivalent in quality to mp3 128 kbs, although wma at 96 kbs does seem to be roughly equivalent in quality to mp3 at 128 kbs. I have not attempted such comparisons with ogg vorbis and mp3. I suspect that you would find that ogg vorbis at 96 kbs would compare well to mp3 at 128 kbs and that this is where you would find a significantly smaller file size for ogg vorbis. But this would be because ogg vorbis can provide the same quality as mp3 at lower bitrates (or higher quality at the same bitrates). You may also find yourslef very happy with ogg vorbis at 64 kbs. I would encourage you to do some listening comparisons to decide for yourself what makes the most sense for you in terms of quality vs. size.
Best wishes,
BillComment
-
Re: Shouldn't Ogg be smaller than Mp3
Thank you for your replies. And thanks for clearing up the confusion. I converted an mp3 to a 64kps ogg and it sounds pretty good. There is not a very noticable differenace between the two. The mp3 is 11mb and the ogg 3mb! Now I can fit a lot more music on my player.Comment
-
Re: Shouldn't Ogg be smaller than Mp3
Glad you found what compression you could not notice yet save space.Comment
-
Re: Shouldn't Ogg be smaller than Mp3
:cry: dang exams, look what i've missed
ogg vorbis is almost twice as effecient as mp3, especially when you use a custom lowpass filter
use the commandline encoder:
oggenc -q 0 --advanced-encode-option lowpass_frequency=XX input.wav
XX = the desired lowpass frequency in khz
give it a go
Comment
Comment