OGG Vorbis

I have decided to take on the time consuming task of re-encoding my audio library. It is currently in MP3 format, but I would prefer to have them in Vorbis OGG. I have 15.7GB and 4447 files. I should probably be getting some sun today, but I feel more motivated to do this. I will make another post when I finish the job (likely in a few days).

(note: I am using the original CD to re-encode from I am not converting MP3s)

This entry was posted in Linux. Bookmark the permalink.

22 Responses to OGG Vorbis

  1. Jens says:

    why do you switch to ogg?

    • Charles Profitt says:

      I have two reasons – #1 = better quality, #2 = Freedom.

      • Jens says:

        #1 but if you re-encode your mp3s now to ogg, you will have a quality loss, instead of win.

        i would switch to ogg, if my friends (mac-users) would be able to play them in itunes. but thats not working at the moment

  2. Benni says:

    Sorry to be nitpicking, but shouldn’t it be ‘Ogg Vorbis’?

  3. Jeff says:

    Re-encoding MP3 to Vorbis is something I considered for a long time, then ultimately decided against.

    Instead, I’ve just re-ripped all my CDs as Vorbis or, in many cases, FLAC. I’ve then encoded anything I already had stored as uncompressed WAV to FLAC.

    As for the rest… as much as I hate it, I’m not strong enough to deny myself MP3 playback capabilities on my primary machine anyway, so for the remaining MP3s (and, I must admit, the occasional WMA if that’s how I was given it) I’m just leaving them as is. I just can’t justify the quality I’d lose by re-encoding from one lossy format to another.

    • Charles Profitt says:

      When I say re-encoding I am re-extracting them from the original CD, not doing a conversion of the MP3.

  4. I would highly recommend, if you have the CDs, re-ripping them in FLAC instead. Lossless audio sounds so, so good. And the codec is open source.

    • Charles Profitt says:

      I wonder what the size would be… Yes, I have the original CDs. I sense I must do a test rip to compare the size.

  5. Brian Lucas says:

    In reguards to no 1. You won’t gain quality by reencoding. You’ll more than likely lose some. Making the highs sound tinny and distorted.

    • Charles Profitt says:

      Apparently I have made a huge mistake in describing my process… I am re-encoding the music using the original CD content not converting the MP3 versions.

  6. Brian Lucas says:

    wow. 4 new comments while I was writing. Please ignore the slow guy on the mobile. Nothing to see here.

  7. fgdf says:

    It would be nice if your CD collection is creative commons music, else I don’t see sense to the ogg stuff. If you has a free format containing privative music…

    • Charles Profitt says:

      An honest thought… but I like the quality of OGG as well. Though I am looking at FLAC right now as was suggested earlier.

  8. jacob says:

    Here’s for friends jailed by iTunes:


  9. Dread Knight says:

    Hmm, I’m in a similar situation, but was thinking of reencoding the mp3s….. meh…
    And now it should be “OGA” as far as i know for audio files, and “OGV” for video ones.

    The idea would be to save a bit of disk space…

  10. Milan says:

    I have also decided to re-encode my audio library and from now only to use ogg format for my new audio encoding🙂

  11. Pingback: OGG Vorbis « Free Trader Beowulf | AudioCDArea.Com

  12. Martin says:

    Hey! Some people already suggested you use FLAC. I absolutely insist that you do!🙂

    Do you really want to face re-ripping the CD:s yet another time when the current OGG format has become obsolete, or does not suit your needs? Do you really need to accept generation loss if you want to re-encode the files to, say, a more highly compressed format to carry in your cell phone or for a device that does not support OGG?

    No. You already made this mistake once. Buy a big disk (they are cheap), go lossless, then batch re-encode the FLACs to the (OGG) format(s) that suit(s) you best at the moment.

  13. Andy says:

    I recommend FLAC too. It generally compresses a CD down to about 300MB.

    I then occasionally run a batch job to convert from FLAC to something smaller to go onto a portable device. But, I know that I’ll never have to re-rip everything. If you don’t have the space, then seriously consider buying a portable hard drive for it all.

    What’s more, you can be smug, and pretend you can hear the difference🙂

  14. Eric Pritchett says:

    I did that once too, but ended up just going with flac in the end. Just the thought of having a “master cd” in flac with no loss of audio quality made me more happy and I could finally get rid of the original cds. Just a thought.😀

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s