Gogo-no-coda (uploaded to incoming)

combo · 2004-09-25 22:48:23

Hi!
There is a very cool GPL mp3 encoder: gogo. Based on lame, but it has SSE, SSE2, 3DNowext ... optimalizations, so much much faster. The quality is the same as lame's quality. But this prog is not really known by users, the other linux distros don't contain it eighter (because of its Japanese homepage?) But after I tried it, I use it forever (like Arch:) instead of lame, at least 2x faster on my machine. As I know, its command-line parameters compatible with lame's. So I suggest you to implement your cool distro (at least the extra directory). At least the arch
users will use it.
It's homepage: http://homepage2.nifty.com/kei-i/
By(t)e

Thikasabrik · 2004-09-26 10:26:28

The quality is not likely to be the same as lame (at equivalent bitrate/available settings), this is mainly because the psycho-accoustic model used is different (not npsytune), it is based on an older lame version, and it does not include the equivalent of the --preset or --alt-preset settings that tune lame optimally.
However, it is much faster in most cases, which will be useful to some people who might prefer to trade a little quality for a lot of speed.

combo · 2004-09-26 11:16:37

Hi!
I think, you think the old (2.39) version of gogo. In version 3.x the quality has been improved. I don't know its pshycho-accoustic, but freshmeat writes the same as me: http://freshmeat.net/projects/gogo/ .
I think, that the CPU optimalization makes it so fast and not (ONLY) the lower(?) quality. Anyway, I don't hear any difference (beacause of my bad ears and noisy soundcard:)
By(t)e

paranoos · 2004-09-26 11:56:13

gogo is not more cpu optimized than lame. if you're just reading the freshmeat pages, gogo says it is optimized for 3dnow, mmx, sse, etc... lame has these optimizations too. if the other "optimizations" they used resulted in equal quality, then it would not be a separate project.

the reason i write "optimizations" is because imho, an optimization gives you either: better output with same work, or same output with less work (or ideally better output with less work ). gogo gives worse output with less work.

gogo is meant to be a fast encoder, no more, no less. they take quality shortcuts in order to reach their goal. this is made obvious in listening tests ... have a look at hydrogenaudio.org (heh sorry i can't provide an exact link, my router is currently preventing me from visiting this page ... i'm trying to fix that). Honestly, the quality-optimized LAME isn't perfect either -- there are quite a few other formats that provide better quality.

by the way, don't download gogo from freshmeat ... it hasn't been updated in over 2 years. this page has a link to a much newer version.

now, gogo still has a reason to exist, and there are users who prefer very fast encoding and aren't picky enough to know the difference. if you have a look at the arch repos, it includes BladeEnc, which is a FAR inferior, older encoder (that isn't in development!). get rid of it, and add gogo instead. can't be too different from LAME's pkgbuild.

combo · 2004-09-26 15:40:38

Hi!
It seems, you are right. If you can please post the link where these encoder tests are. I've downloaded lame 3.96.1 and I found in the source the CPU-optimalization gogo parts. To tell the truth, I'm using gogo for a long time (where lame didn't contain these codes.)
There are lame 3.92 VBR parts used in gogo 3.13.
Thx for your answer

Namlook · 2004-09-26 20:43:05

Yeh !
I'm quite interesting about gogo. I looked it for a while but never can install it. If anybody could make a PKGBUILD (I can do it but todays, I have a lot of work to do) i would be very nice !

aCoder · 2004-09-27 00:03:26

Actually, I got in installed, but it's a lot of assembly and doesn't use configure, although it looks like it's there, so it only installs to /usr/local unless you edit the Makefile in src/linux. I'm not sure how to manage that in a pkgbuild besides a patch, and having never worked on a project I needed to, I've never used diff to make a patch, and when I tried it, it wouldn't patch, so I gave up. I'm not even sure why I tried it in the first place, since I've only ever used ogg.

combo · 2004-10-01 13:30:39

Hi!
I uploaded gogo to incoming.
Plz test (and enjoy) it!
By(t)e

Arch Linux

#1 2004-09-25 22:48:23

Gogo-no-coda (uploaded to incoming)

#2 2004-09-26 10:26:28

Re: Gogo-no-coda (uploaded to incoming)

#3 2004-09-26 11:16:37

Re: Gogo-no-coda (uploaded to incoming)

#4 2004-09-26 11:56:13

Re: Gogo-no-coda (uploaded to incoming)

#5 2004-09-26 15:40:38

Re: Gogo-no-coda (uploaded to incoming)

#6 2004-09-26 20:43:05

Re: Gogo-no-coda (uploaded to incoming)

#7 2004-09-27 00:03:26

Re: Gogo-no-coda (uploaded to incoming)

#8 2004-10-01 13:30:39

Re: Gogo-no-coda (uploaded to incoming)

Board footer