Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Amarok 2.8 Plays Opus Audio, ASX Playlists

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Amarok 2.8 Plays Opus Audio, ASX Playlists

    Phoronix: Amarok 2.8 Plays Opus Audio, ASX Playlists

    Joining in on the KDE 4.11 release fun this week is the Amarok 2.8 multimedia player release...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQzODY

  • #2
    I already have a music player that plays .opus, still its good news

    Rhythmbox already plays .opus. Amarok is beginning to support it as well is also good news...

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by powdigsig View Post
      Rhythmbox already plays .opus. Amarok is beginning to support it as well is also good news...
      Amarok could play opus files since ages (when the used phonon backend was compiled with opus support). Only new is: you can now convert other files into opus files & you can now tag opus files

      Comment


      • #4
        It also have visualisations now

        So, how does OPUS compare to OGG?

        Comment


        • #5
          Not bad. I'll have to fix MIDI support in it at some point, once I get around to it.

          Still waiting for that phonon-gstreamer GStreamer 1.0 support, though. That should fix the annoying pause issue with OGGs and MIDIs. Hopefully it will make it into phonon-gstreamer 4.6.4.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by powdigsig View Post
            Rhythmbox already plays .opus. Amarok is beginning to support it as well is also good news...
            Except Rhythmbox is terrible mess from an UI standpoint.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Redi44 View Post
              It also have visualisations now

              So, how does OPUS compare to OGG?
              Ogg is a container format at Opus an audio codec with a quite wide use case (low bit rate, high bit rate, speech, music, for lossy connections, for lossless connections, ...). So you could compare it against Ogg Vorbis, but then you have to define the usecase. For example Ogg Vorbis will be a lot worse on low bit rate speech. Or you could compare it against (Ogg) Speex. But speex would be bad for high bitrate music.

              An old test (which includes Ogg Vorbis) for "medioker" bitrate music can be found here: http://listening-tests.hydrogenaudio...c/results.html

              Some more tests can be found at http://www.opus-codec.org/comparison/GoogleTest1.pdf and http://www.opus-codec.org/comparison/GoogleTest2.pdf and http://research.nokia.com/files/publ...Opus_Codec.pdf


              To make it short: it is an extreme amazing codec and the opponents have to go to therapy for years after these tests.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Redi44 View Post
                It also have visualisations now

                So, how does OPUS compare to OGG?
                Opus is a codec, Ogg a container. Opus usually can be found in an Ogg container.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                  Except Rhythmbox is terrible mess from an UI standpoint.
                  Is it a bigger mess than Amarok? I'm not so sure.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by psychoticmeow View Post
                    Is it a bigger mess than Amarok? I'm not so sure.
                    It doesn't matter which player you think is better. The point was that gstreamer1.0 apps have had opus support (and Amarok has had support depending on which phonon backend was used).

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by psychoticmeow View Post
                      Is it a bigger mess than Amarok? I'm not so sure.
                      One thing that can be said for Amarok is that it at least tries to execute what it thinks a music player should look like; Rhythmbox doesn't even bother. It's just a file manager with a seek bar and player buttons.

                      For me, it's a tie between Amarok and Clementine. They employ similar use cases. I load it up, click some items on the left and they are added to a play list on the right. Simple.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by cardboard View Post
                        One thing that can be said for Amarok is that it at least tries to execute what it thinks a music player should look like; Rhythmbox doesn't even bother. It's just a file manager with a seek bar and player buttons.

                        For me, it's a tie between Amarok and Clementine. They employ similar use cases. I load it up, click some items on the left and they are added to a play list on the right. Simple.
                        Yeah, fair enough. I was coming from the perspective of trying to use Amarok (and Clemantine) on several occasions and just being bewildered by the interface. At least with Rhythmbox it's simple enough to understand.

                        But I'm really waiting for Gnome Music.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Redi44 View Post
                          So, how does OPUS compare to OGG?
                          (I assume you're talking about Vorbis, which most people refer to as "Ogg", since that's the file extension that Ogg Vorbis files traditionally have.)

                          Since listening tests that compare Opus with Vorbis are always done at low bitrates (64kbps and lower), it is safe to assume that Opus doesn't compete with Vorbis at higher bitrates. Usually you encode your music (or other audio) with Vorbis at something higher than q0 (which ends up being around 64kbps.) Like q4 (~128kbps) or q6 "to be sure" (~192kbps).

                          So for ripping your CDs, it would appear that Vorbis is the way to go. I imagine that for streaming though, Opus will be very attractive in the future due to its IETF standardization and excellent low-bitrate performance.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                            Since listening tests that compare Opus with Vorbis are always done at low bitrates (64kbps and lower), it is safe to assume that Opus doesn't compete with Vorbis at higher bitrates.
                            I don't think that is a safe assumption at all. Codecs intended for accurate reproduction tend to be fairly similar at high bitrates, especially recent ones, so it is harder to tease out the differences. Lower bitrates are, therefore, easier to test and more useful for determining which codec is best for cases where your choice of codec actually matters.
                            Last edited by TheBlackCat; 08-18-2013, 06:50 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TheBlackCat View Post
                              I don't think that is a safe assumption at all. Codecs intended for accurate reproduction tend to be fairly similar at high bitrates, especially recent ones, so it is harder to tease out the differences. Lower bitrates are, therefore, easier to test and more useful for determining which codec is best for cases where your choice of codec actually matters.
                              Past listening tests on Hydrogenaudio have concluded that some codecs perform better at low bitrates compared to other codecs, but worse at higher ones. For example HE-AAC would win over Vorbis at low rates, but not on high ones.

                              When a codec wins at a low bitrate, it doesn't mean it's better than another one when you raise the bitrate. This is the basis of my assumption; if they don't test higher bitrates, it can mean that they don't consider high bitrate Opus to actually compete against Vorbis.
                              Last edited by RealNC; 08-18-2013, 08:42 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X