OpenAL, OpenML

What would you like to compare them to?

I've used OpenAL successfully. It was relatively simple, though it didn't have as nice a specification or documentation as OpenGL, it worked just fine. I seem to recall there having been a few bugs and unresolved issues in the Linux implementation, but nothing that affected me while I was implementing the audio system for my game engine.

I can't tell you anything about OpenML. I've never used it.

Cheers!

I wonder if there is a software implementation out there, although hordware acceleration would be fabulous. I wish NVIDIA/ATI provide hardware video decoding/encoding support through OpenML just like DXVA.

I don't know about OpenML, but OpenAL worked fine for me, including 3d sound, though on windows, I think it reverts to DirectSound anyway if DX is on the system.

"OpenML® is a royalty-free, cross-platform programming environment for capturing, transporting, processing, displaying, and synchronizing digital media - including 2D/3D graphics and audio/video streams."

"OpenAL is a cross-platform 3D audio API appropriate for use with gaming applications and many other types of audio applications."

As you see, OpenML is for video and audio, where as OpenAL is a 3D sound API.

If you just want a 3D sound API, use OpenAL. If you want the works (graphics and video), use OpemML.