The forum · September 2003 – July 2004 › NEWS

Future Download Formats...

What do you prefer?

Started by Alle · 62 posts · 989 views · this thread in the Internet Archive

1. Alle11 Feb 2004, 18:31
   I'm working 24/7 on the MP3/VIP Vault and I've reached a crossroad in regards of what file format to use.
   
   I'm currently thinking about using WMA Encoding for all trance[]control Music Downloads - Mainly due to the extreeme compression and high soundquality, however since you guys will be the end users - What's your opinion?
   
   Please vote for whatever option you think would be best, and feel free to drop a comment saying why you voted the way you did.
   
   Best,
   
   Alex
2. Lucas11 Feb 2004, 19:06
   I think MP3 would be great. I know that OGG is the best music format, but MP3 is the most popular.
3. Alle11 Feb 2004, 19:18
   I Think I might've been wrong about guests being allowed to vote without registering/loging in - I've tried to alter the Guest Permissions mask - however it doesn't respond. I'm very sorry about this but hopefully you can simply drop a quick reply letting me know what format you'd want to have.
   
   Best,
   
   Alex

   Edited by Alle on 11 Feb 2004, 19:22

4. slapdaddy0611 Feb 2004, 19:29
   Well I've always been used to MP3 format...I'm not too sure about others...I've heard OGG and WMA are pretty good formats but I think most people are more familiar with MP3 than anything else. :) So thats my vote :devil:
5. Alle11 Feb 2004, 19:48
   Yeah - true... Just updated the ID3 info on all the MP3 files in the Vault - Will add more files for download later today, and I'll also start writing tutorials.
   
   Best,
   
   Alex
6. Zxian11 Feb 2004, 20:00
   I've always been a fan of MP3s, just because they're easy to use and the software to use them is very widespread.
   
   On the other hand, switching to WMA would allow t[]c to get more songs online and keep costs low (in terms of both storage and bandwidth).
   
   In the end, you guys are making the music, and we will bend you your will. :P You are our trance lords and masters!!!
   
   Nick
7. MrGoodbytes11 Feb 2004, 20:08
   I also think mp3 would be the best route because that is what most people have and they are the most well-known. You can use them on newer CD players and mp3 players, where some other formats you can't.
   
   It might be a good idea to go with multiple formats if you can afford the space.
   
   That's just what I think,
   Graeme
8. xkwox11 Feb 2004, 20:14
   Mp3's ;)
9. Harry11 Feb 2004, 20:45
   Hi,
   
   I would prefer MP3 format with a minimum bitrate of 256 kBit.
   However songs with several different bitrates would be nice too.
   
   regards
   Harry
10. ephex11 Feb 2004, 21:03
    OK Alle, here is my official view on file formats:
    
    NO WMA! Sure maybe it offers higher compression but, at least to my ears, the sound quality is just not there. But most importantly of all, WMA is a CLOSED format! That means your lovely fans who happen to be die-hard linux users may not be able to listen to your music any more. That is a bad thing. No AAC either, nice sound, but not an open format.
    
    MP3 may be a closed format as well, but it is much more widely supported. Honestly I am dissatisfied with MP3 even at 192kb/s, but MP3 may be your best bet.
    
    My vote, however, goes undoubtably to Ogg! It is a fantastik file format, and is completely open as well. There is simply nothing better [except maybe FLACs, but they are HUGE!]. Support on hardware players is still just starting to appear [lucky for me my wonderful rio karma supports Ogg :D], so it may be best to stick with mp3 until ogg is compatable with most audio players/cd burning software.
    
    If you can spare the bandwidth, I would have mp3@128 and ogg@q3. For the VIP Vault, mp3@192 and ogg@q5.
11. Alle11 Feb 2004, 21:12
    ephex: Thanks for the enlightment - I didn't know all that :)
    
    As for bandwith - to let you guys know what we're talking about @ the present time.
    
    In January the MP3 Vault had about 1,000 members and 24 files (A/V Performance clips included). And during January alone, just the MP3 files alone required a bandwith of 65 GB - Now guess what would happend with the bandwith requirements if I where to add ALL our songs (60 or so) plus mixsets, performance clips etc... in multiple formats, and at the same time, make sure to consider a constant increase of members ;)
    
    I've got a 100Mbit connection comming to my server in April (10Mbit @ the present time), another fellow offered me space on his 2x100Mbit servers, http://www.digitaldeejay.com also offered their support so hopefully I'll have the situation under control fairly soon.
    Right now my own server is going nuts from traffic, though that's a good thing :)
    
    Just saying that at this very moment I can not host 256kbps files.
    
    
    Best,
    
    Alex
12. VooDooKing11 Feb 2004, 21:26
    I believe AAC has the highest quality, but since MP3 is still the most popular, it would be the most obvious choice (preferably encoded with lame --r3mix :P).
13. TxMan11 Feb 2004, 21:55
    I would prefer MP3 for my computer and WMA for my iPAQ...
14. Guest11 Feb 2004, 21:57
    192KBPS MP3 all the way. It keeps it's great quality, and MP3 players, DVD players, and even a lot of new CD players can allow you to listen to them.
    
    And besides, think of us running on Linux!
15. voodooA411 Feb 2004, 21:57
    how about two setups for the mp3 vault? you could charge a low fee for average users who just want to listen to the songs (encoded with at least 160kbps MP3) and a higher amount for professionals/audiophiles who want to get the files encoded in a lossless format (FLAC maybe?)...although this would require a bit more storage space, I think the real question here is bandwidth requirements...and while the FLAC downloads would be a good amount larger, the higher cost for access that part of the vault would make it feasible to offer it.
16. Lexx11 Feb 2004, 22:00
    Hi!
    
    My vote goes for mp3 too.
17. Recluse11 Feb 2004, 22:14
    If it were up to me alone I would say Ogg since it is the best format. Mp3 is the one most people are famliar with and its not a bad format either. WMA, supposedly good, I don't see it (or hear it rather). I voted mp3 since its the easiest to use. If possible I would go with ogg and mp3. FLAC lol don't even worry about them, you might as well put up the wav files as you render them.
18. Alle11 Feb 2004, 22:59
    Thanks a lot - I see a good ammount of ways to go about this, however - keep the ideas coming in!
    
    Best,
    
    Alex
19. TranceSynthVania11 Feb 2004, 23:03
    I think MP3 would be your best shot. Ogg sounds good, but not all players support it, so I would for example be able to play it with winamp only, but I wouldn't be able to store the tracks in my music library in MusicMatch Jukebox.
    
    So I go for mp3. But please, no less than 192!
20. DjDaed11 Feb 2004, 23:14
    MP3 all the way. Prolly cuz I'm used to it now.
21. DjLux11 Feb 2004, 23:25
    Mp3 for me,but with ABR preset 128,joint stereo and NO CRC B)
    
    @ Alle: An advice,use Lame 3.95 instead of 3.92 for 128kbps mp3 files,it offers more quality
22. Jason11 Feb 2004, 23:39
    MP3, of course! Thanks for the trax, keep 'em coming...
23. Alle12 Feb 2004, 01:27
    DjLux : Thanks for the advice ;)
24. Possession12 Feb 2004, 04:08
    Mp3 Format All The Way Problly 192kbps :devil2:
25. solarapex12 Feb 2004, 04:13
    Why don't you provide both WMA (for folks that like quality) and MP3 (for folk that like simple things).
    
    Thanks for the great music.
    
    Alex
26. djdarkshade12 Feb 2004, 04:50
    I think MP3 and Ogg are the way to go. Ogg because of the quality and size (or lack there of), and MP3 because it's compatable with 99% of things. I'm not a supporter of windows, so naturally I don't like WMA. Speaking of which, I'm reformatting my computer tomarrow with Redhat Linux and Wine.
    
    Rawk on.
27. cosmin12 Feb 2004, 10:26
    MP3 format, it easy to download.
    :rolleyes: [COLOR=red]
28. acidizd12 Feb 2004, 13:58
    i would say 192 kbps MP3 constant bit rate is best and has a decent file size.
    i also recommend the videos be in mpeg format, i cant get them to play, and i cant find the codecs for them either. B)
29. Alle12 Feb 2004, 17:36
    Acidizd: Thanks for the advice, download the DivX codec & player @ http://www.divx.com and it'll work for you.
    
    Best,
    
    Alex
30. noname_31212 Feb 2004, 18:43
    I think mp3 well do great ! :eek: :music:
31. ziggy12 Feb 2004, 20:00
    definitely mp3 because i like winamp the best
32. Blueraver0412 Feb 2004, 20:55
    I think .ogg and.mp3 would be fine. I don't like WMA much simply because the plug ins to make it play in other players aren't the best.
    Thanks
33. opterongeek12 Feb 2004, 21:40
    I use high end speakers at home myself, and 256 bit is overkill often times. 128 KB is fine. I've done my own independant tests between the two formats, and even with another set of ears from audiophile friends there's not much of a difference. Keep hosting the 128's for now.
    
    and yes, MP3 is the preferred format for me as well.
34. Alle12 Feb 2004, 23:46
    Opterongeek: Hehehe, we're reference listening to most of our work in MP3/128k format on a pair of Apogee Scintilla (before them a pair of Apogee Slant6), so as an Audophile you should be know what I'm talking about :)
    
    Best,
    
    Alex
35. Ohmzcon13 Feb 2004, 01:03
    Nm, I posted firstly stating favor for strictly Ogg, then just uncompress and recompress into MP3 format for player compatibility but then I found this on Vorbis.com:
    
    Can I convert my MP3 collection to the Ogg Vorbis format?
    
    You can convert any audio format to Ogg Vorbis. However, converting from one lossy format, like MP3, to another lossy format, like Vorbis, is generally a bad idea. Both MP3 and Vorbis encoders achieve high compression ratios by throwing away parts of the audio waveform that you probably won't hear. However, the MP3 and Vorbis codecs are very different, so they each will throw away different parts of the audio, although there certainly is some overlap. Converting a MP3 to Vorbis involves decoding the MP3 file back to an uncompressed format, like WAV, and recompressing it using the Ogg Vorbis encoder. The decoded MP3 will be missing the parts of the original audio that the MP3 encoder chose to discard. The Ogg Vorbis encoder will then discard other audio components when it compresses the data. At best, the result will be an Ogg file that sounds the same as your original MP3, but it is most likely that the resulting file will sound worse than your original MP3. In no case will you get a file that sounds better than the original MP3.
    
    Since many music players can play both MP3 and Ogg files, there is no reason that you should have to switch all of your files to one format or the other. If you like Ogg Vorbis, then we would encourage you to use it when you encode from original, lossless audio sources (like CDs). When encoding from originals, you will find that you can make Ogg files that are smaller or of better quality (or both) than your MP3s.
    
    So yea stay with MP3 then I guess. Wish there was a better way :|. Only other thing I can think of is offer both.
36. t[]c lover13 Feb 2004, 01:45
    if im not mistaken, they have winamp for linux which plays most of those formats. I prefer mp3 cause i dont think my sound enhancer can do Wmas, etc. also, on closed formats, winamp has to buffer. I hate that.
37. Alle13 Feb 2004, 04:44
    Well, regardless - MP3 is the format that will continue to be our main format, however for those who enjoy Ogg we'll serve that as well. I also think this is a way to reduce bandwith usage since some prefer Ogg, while others dont. Simply saying the share of people who prefer Ogg will help to reduce the bandwith usage ;)
    
    Thanks for all the inputs! Keep em coming ;)
    
    My best,
    
    Alex
38. jeev13 Feb 2004, 08:08
    i prefer mp3 simply because its easier to work with, and it great when paired with winamp.
39. Harry13 Feb 2004, 21:45
    Alex,
    
    To save bandwidth, a solution can be a rotation principle of your songs offer.
    For instance you can provide for download a group of 10 different songs on Monday, another group of 10 songs on Tuesday, and so on until Sunday.
    And each following week the songs offer will be looped again from the beginning.
    
    I think the guys who want to download your songs can live with this and the deal may be providing songs in better quality (192-256kbit/s) with stable bandwith.
    
    Think about it! ;)
    
    Best,
    Harry
40. Alle14 Feb 2004, 00:44
    Harry: Yeah - that's one idea, however we've got an idea of using multiple servers and simply evenly distribute the files over the diffrent servers. Rotation of available files could be one suggest, however I'm sure a lot of people would only find that annoying.
    
    Best,
    
    Alex
41. Alle14 Feb 2004, 00:48
    As for the bitrate.... 192kbps is the absolute maxium we will use... In almost every case 160kbps is more then enough - if you say no to that you'll most likely need to think it over. In most cases it's all up to the coder/decoder engine - coder engine being the one I use to compress the files, decoder engine being the one You use to listen to the files. If thiese two are badly matched then I'm positive that the outcome will most likely sound bad - however if they're a match - I'm as sure as you won't be able to tell the diffrence from a 160kbps and the uncompressed .wav file.
    
    Just my opinion - however I'm no proffessor within this subject.
    
    Best,
    
    Alex
42. Dj-M14 Feb 2004, 07:31
    I say go mp3's. 192 is more than enough (Cd Quality). People may seem to think that their mp3s dont sound good cause its not just the bit rate that counts when encoding the wav file its also the sample rate of the wave file. If its too high (ie 48000). If it's encoded into a standard 41000 mp3 file it aint gonna sound too good. Just make sure the sample rates match up and youll be ok. :D
43. cyph3r14 Feb 2004, 07:36
    my suggestion: MP3 @ 128 kb/s!
    WMA, although considerably better regarding the file size, doesn't sound so good
    to me. i also think that the VIP Vault is an excellent idea.
    best wishes
    cyph3r
44. jamesmunro14 Feb 2004, 18:19
    :wub:
    It HAS to be MP3, the most widely used format and quite frankly the quality even at 128kbps is good enough for me.
    
    MP3 PLEASE !!!
45. BUDdilla15 Feb 2004, 03:17
    Consider MP4 as a new format. It has Better Quality/file size ratio than MP3.
    it is also muti platform supported. Im not sure about *nix. Yet im sure *nix
    Community has a way to listen. Open Source all the way. Sometimes you have
    to break down n go with the main stream. So stick with MP3 or move
    to MP4 it even supports Stereo in 24k streams!!! :D
46. t[]c lover16 Feb 2004, 19:19
    if youre going multiples, then please include AAC. it can be put on Ipod, the most popular player, its smaller, better quality, and winamp still plays it!
47. lkollar18 Feb 2004, 03:41
    I'd prefer to see MP3 and AAC (aka MP4) myself. Anything but WMA is fine, though.
48. Timotheos18 Feb 2004, 04:53
    I vote mp3's. They are the most popular as far as I know and not only would WMA ruin it for Linux users but for Mac users in love with iTunes (which kicks some serious @$$ by the way). Free mp3 playing apps can be found in good supply, quality and variations for all operating systems as far as I know. My brother thinks that "if it's not to much trouble AAC would be really good for quite a few people who can play them" :music:
49. Guest18 Feb 2004, 07:39
    I'd prefer mp3 too. It's just the most universal format. I would like higher bitrates than 128 though.
50. Zendu19 Feb 2004, 14:18
    Definitly mp3, although multimle formats whould definity be cool also, i doubt if its worth your time.
51. jonlrabbit21 Feb 2004, 00:43
    mp3 already is winning the debate, but I'll still post my preference for it. It's the most universal format, and anything else might as well be using a Beta VCR. Yes, AAC may be better sound quality, and Ogg Vorbis may be free, but mp3 remains the gold standard format.
    
    wma, not surprisingly, is trying to take over. Classic Microsoft behavior. I'll spare you the full rant, as you've probably heard it a billion times, and many of you told it a billion times yourself. It may have better compression overall, but it's going to remain less popular than mp3 because of the built-in crippling features. Some wma files self-destruct, others track themselves and count copies made, and in the future, it will probably even report itself less than anonymously in an effort to "fight piracy," "protect children," or the many other reasons that Big Brother type forces use to justify their means. Even though I can rip my own CDs into wmas that don't have built-in tracking, I'm wary of the format in general out of paranoia, and I don't think I'm alone. And, there's a lot of people who will refuse to adopt it for plenty of other reasons, or even simply because it's a Microsoft format.
    
    By comparison, mp3 was around longer, is more widely used, and most likely will continue to be around longer than any of the other formats. For purposes of long-term archival, I put all of my digital music in that format. Twenty years from now, when I'm feeling nostalgic, I suspect it will be a lot easier to convert mp3 to the future-current media or format than something obscure like Ogg Vorbis. (I also won't have to worry about the file "expiring"! Some wma files self-destruct.)
52. Josiah22 Feb 2004, 08:25
    I Prefer, OGG Format its the best.
53. t[]c lover29 Feb 2004, 18:54
    generally, its a toss-up. WInamp plays most of these formats but I would LOVE to see AAC
54. Plox1 Mar 2004, 23:59
    I say FLAC.
    
    Users can easily convert FLAC to any format they like.
    If you choose MP3 or other loss formats, then there is loss of quality.
    
    I'd like it pure with FLAC.
55. t[]c lover3 Mar 2004, 00:32
    FLAC had a plugin for winamp but its not winamp5 compatible. FLAC is great, but most players cant play it, I love t[]c but I dont wanna have to download some random player with a userbase of like 2.
56. JustinClift3 Mar 2004, 09:08
    Hi,
    
    Definitely OGG.
    
    Having supporting an open file format is a good way to go, and many media players that support MP3 "out of the box" (including WinAMP) have included OGG support for a long time as well.
    
    If I came to your site and you had both OGG and MP3's to download, I'd download the OGG ones. The higher the bitrate or quality setting the better of course.
    
    Hope that's helpful.
    
    :-)
    
    Regards and best wishes,
    
    Justin Clift
57. mod21 Mar 2004, 03:18
    I say mp3 for two reasons:
    
    1) It is the most popular and widely used format, and you don't need any weird players to listen to it
    
    and 2) I can play mp3s only on my mp3 player :D
    
    
    
    mod
58. Felix5 Apr 2004, 17:02
    With iTunes' growing popularity, AAC are becoming more and more common. As an iTunes user, I'd vote for any combination of MP3, OGG, and/or AAC. The only problem I see with OGG is that it isn't natively supported in iTunes, and you have to download outsider plug-ins to play it [which aren't perfect].
59. t[]c lover7 Apr 2004, 00:12
    The OGG Problem is sort of the same with winamp, but it works great with those more compact AAC's. And newer mp3 players support it now.
60. Guest10 Apr 2004, 03:47
    I believe that it is better in MP3 but with a little more of [bitrate] :D
61. Plox23 Apr 2004, 04:20
    If bandwidth and storage was not a problem, I'd say say FLAC.
    
    Currently for sake of bandwidth, I think MP3 is the best. I have not played with AAC so I have no idead how it sounds.
    
    I did find a review of codecs.
    
    Codec Review
    
    I am currently encoding using LAME with VBR at 4 or 3 and using the NEW method. I think the songs come out sounding pretty good. I do perfer MP3 formats over others for cause most programs and device will play then.
62. Guest28 Apr 2004, 12:54
    You said that guest's were to vote by posting...
    Ofcourse ogg!
    But since many like mp3 too(because of the wide player(hardware) support) Wouldn't both be a good choice. It would not increase traffic since people probably will only download the files in the format they want.
    Sorry if all had been said before. But i had to filll the post with something.. :)