TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- USA - New York
-- is OGG better than mp3?
is OGG better than mp3?
this is what i heard from other forums, i could like to know if OGG is better than MP3 in sound quality, i might want to try OGG in good sound system
/quote /b i choose OGG as it is easy to setup and the file sizes are very small while still keeping the quality of the original. /b /quote
OGG sucks. First off, it's a pain in the ass to find any way to convert OGG to MP3. Nothing plays OGG, and most people never even heard of OGG.
OGG is a compressed sound file that takes up less space than an MP3 without loosing quality in the sound (I think). It's only purpose is to save space. I have like 30 OGG songs from last year that I haven't bothered to convert because it's time consuming.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by EnigmaT OGG sucks. First off, it's a pain in the ass to find any way to convert OGG to MP3. Nothing plays OGG, and most people never even heard of OGG. OGG is a compressed sound file that takes up less space than an MP3 without loosing quality in the sound (I think). It's only purpose is to save space. I have like 30 OGG songs from last year that I haven't bothered to convert because it's time consuming. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by arctic *Invades american forums* Wrong. Winamp can play them, dbpoweramp can convert them, and they're better quality. So in short, yes, they are better |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Vlad I dont think so, I think ogg plays at 64 or 48 kbps - I used to have loads of ogg files cause I wanted to save space. The sound quality is better on mp3's. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by EnigmaT OGG sucks. First off, it's a pain in the ass to find any way to convert OGG to MP3. Nothing plays OGG, and most people never even heard of OGG. OGG is a compressed sound file that takes up less space than an MP3 without loosing quality in the sound (I think). It's only purpose is to save space. I have like 30 OGG songs from last year that I haven't bothered to convert because it's time consuming. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by arctic eh? So they were encoded at 64/48. Well in that case, of course the sound quality isn't going to be any good, because they're encoded at a low bitrate. Encode them at 192 or something like that |
http://www.vorbis.com/software.psp?pid=2 
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.