Nice, but if 24_tuba_arpegio_melodious_phrase_stereo on the samples page is not a conversion error, it might explain why at least basic psychoacoustic model and/or post-processing filter are expected. That static beat is noticeable precisely because of its repetition.
QOA, the Quite OK Audio Format
31–40 of 83 posts
Re: QOA, the Quite OK Audio Format
#32It's not clear to me why Opus doesn't meet their needs. They write it off for not being simple, but is the problem that it's too slow for their application? Are they doing something where they need a very small compiled size [1]? Aesthetically prefer things that are simpler? [1] I ship an Opus encoder and decoder to the browser to support https://www.jefftk.com/p/bucket-brigade-singing and it's just 310KB for compres…
This looks interesting! Do you have a link to the source code of the opus encoder and decoder? The code in the github repo (html/opusjs/decoder.js) looks generated and is hard to understand.
Pretty sure it was https://github.com/Rillke/opusenc.js
(Normally this would be in the commit description but it looks like we forgot to include that https://github.com/jeffkaufman/bucket-brigade/commit/d96b6f3...)
Re: QOA, the Quite OK Audio Format
#33Re: QOA, the Quite OK Audio Format
#34"There still remains a huge gap between lossless codecs at ~800kb/s and MP3 at 128kb/s with seemingly little interest to fill it." Not only does mp3 go to 320kbps, 192kbps was considered the 'standard' for ripping audio CDs, with the V0 variable bit rate being another common choice. if this only does 277, what am I getting aside from. another audio codec?
Simplicity and low cpu requirements.
Re: QOA, the Quite OK Audio Format
#35Back in the day I made a few GameBoy Advance demos and we generally stored ADPCM encoded audio streams for the music, at like 4x the space of an equivalent MP3. Thing is, cartridge space was effectively uncapped but CPU speed (4MHz iirc) was very limited. If we had gone for MP3 (or even a reasonably complex tracker module), we’d hardly have had any CPU left for the visuals.
QOA would have likely been the perfect alternative! We’d have better sound quality with no downsides, I think.
Re: QOA, the Quite OK Audio Format
#36Great! Excellent fit for DAWs where lots of samples stay in memory and decode concurrently.
Re: QOA, the Quite OK Audio Format
#37It's not clear to me why Opus doesn't meet their needs. They write it off for not being simple, but is the problem that it's too slow for their application? Are they doing something where they need a very small compiled size [1]? Aesthetically prefer things that are simpler? [1] I ship an Opus encoder and decoder to the browser to support https://www.jefftk.com/p/bucket-brigade-singing and it's just 310KB for compres…
I'm interested this for JS. Most codecs are either patent-heavy or hugely complex (requiring hundreds of kilobytes of WebAssembly), and a lot of the native APIs builtin to browsers have a tendency to shift every few years. It would be nice to have a pure JS alternative to WAV that provides some file reduction.
Re: QOA, the Quite OK Audio Format
#38"There still remains a huge gap between lossless codecs at ~800kb/s and MP3 at 128kb/s with seemingly little interest to fill it." Not only does mp3 go to 320kbps, 192kbps was considered the 'standard' for ripping audio CDs, with the V0 variable bit rate being another common choice. if this only does 277, what am I getting aside from. another audio codec?
Simplicity and low cpu requirements.
the only time I ever had issues playing MP3s was on an old overclocked 486
Re: QOA, the Quite OK Audio Format
#39Re: QOA, the Quite OK Audio Format
#40It's not clear to me why Opus doesn't meet their needs. They write it off for not being simple, but is the problem that it's too slow for their application? Are they doing something where they need a very small compiled size [1]? Aesthetically prefer things that are simpler? [1] I ship an Opus encoder and decoder to the browser to support https://www.jefftk.com/p/bucket-brigade-singing and it's just 310KB for compres…
I'm interested this for JS. Most codecs are either patent-heavy or hugely complex (requiring hundreds of kilobytes of WebAssembly), and a lot of the native APIs builtin to browsers have a tendency to shift every few years. It would be nice to have a pure JS alternative to WAV that provides some file reduction.
> the native APIs builtin to browsers have a tendency to shift every few years
The web platform is incredibly backwards compatible; I'm having trouble thinking of any cases where they've dropped a format (which doesn't mean there aren't any!)
On the other hand, while the browsers generally ship with many codecs [1] the APIs for interacting with them are pretty terrible.
[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/Media/Formats/A...