Mp3 vs Mp4


Recommended Posts

basically it's 30% smaller and better sound quality, encoded at a standard of 64kps instead of mp3's 128kps.

thats half the bitrate man, an no way does a 64kbs AAC compare to 128 MP3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's a little more than a derivation... it USES MP4 to compress the audio. They just added rights management and ID3 tagging and called it AAC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it's a little more than a derivation... it USES MP4 to compress the audio.  They just added rights management and ID3 tagging and called it AAC.

128kbps AAC (MP4) should be comparable to a 160kbps MP3 file in audio quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how can a bit rate of 64 compare to 128 in whatever format.

alright the filesize might be lower but that is about it, somthing which sony have been doing with their ATRAC compression system. You can get 30 albums on 1 cd. and there is no loss in audio quality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

mp4 was realy ment to revolutionise video in the way mp3 did with music and audio over the internet. But since it also is better encoding with audio as well some companys have adoped this format. Others develope other formats to try and impove on this, as with the acc format.

Its just better encoding at the end of the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how can a bit rate of 64 compare to 128 in whatever format.

alright the filesize might be lower but that is about it, somthing which sony have been doing with their ATRAC compression system. You can get 30 albums on 1 cd. and there is no loss in audio quality.

thats impossible

for no audio quality loss, you need a lossless compression and those average only about 50% reduction in file size

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that might have meant to say no *discernible* audio quality loss - and of course that would also depend upon the type of music and the original source as well.

Truly digital music, that has never seen the light of a D/A converter, my be compressed a lot better than an Analog recording converted to digital format when it comes to audio quality loss.

Also, some people can hear the distinctions between samples better than others - I for one am one of those that can hear the difference most times, and thus I prefer audio encoded at 192 or better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer the original post, here is what I know on the subject.

  • MPEG-4 AAC is much newer
  • MP3 is 10 years old
  • MPEG-4 AAC can have up to 48 channels of audio
  • MP3 offers only 2 but I remember reading about some hacks to make more channels
  • MPEG-4 AAC doesn't have the shortcomings of MP3 MP3 shortcomings
  • MPEG-4 AAC+ (AAC+SBR) is going to be super cool when it becomes main-stream. I think it will be the killer application of MP4, streaming to cell phones and what not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To answer the original post, here is what I know on the subject.
  • MPEG-4 AAC is much newer
  • MP3 is 10 years old
  • MPEG-4 AAC can have up to 48 channels of audio
  • MP3 offers only 2 but I remember reading about some hacks to make more channels
  • MPEG-4 AAC doesn't have the shortcomings of MP3 MP3 shortcomings
  • MPEG-4 AAC+ (AAC+SBR) is going to be super cool when it becomes main-stream. I think it will be the killer application of MP4, streaming to cell phones and what not.

MP3 could have up to 6 channels.

-btw- usw mp3pro ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lmfao - yeah - but I use the Win XP Plus! DME to encode files to .wma with variable bitrates, so that makes them even smaller and yet just as good - *BUT* winamp can't play the variable bitrate encoded ones ass of yet - for some reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how can a bit rate of 64 compare to 128 in whatever format.

alright the filesize might be lower but that is about it, somthing which sony have been doing with their ATRAC compression system. You can get 30 albums on 1 cd. and there is no loss in audio quality.

64 kbps WMA sounds the same as 128 kbps MP3...for my MP3 player I use the former, since space is a premium and it's hardly an ideal listening environment anyway. It sounds close enough to CD quality to be tolerable (especially at 2 mins/MB) but on the PC, I accept nothing less than 100% VBR MP3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say Ogg Vorbis.

http://www.vorbis.com

Ogg Vorbis is a new audio compression format. It is roughly comparable to other formats used to store and play digital music, such as MP3, VQF, AAC, and other digital audio formats. It is different from these other formats because it is completely free, open, and unpatented.

I'm a music fan. Why should I be interested?

Because Vorbis provides a high-quality format for you to listen to your music.

[*]For a given file size, Vorbis sounds better than MP3. This means:

      [*] You can keep your music collection at about the same quality level, but it'll take up less space

        or you can have your music collection take up about the same amount of space, but have it sound better.

[*] Vorbis already enjoys widespread player support and work is underway to play Vorbis files on portable hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i like ogg vorbis, but the simple fact is that its not made for higher bitrate transparency, its mostly for the ~128kbt MP3 encoding crowd which does not cut it for me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.