aaron901 Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 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. wait, are you sure AAC uses ID3 tag? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted October 21, 2003 Veteran Share Posted October 21, 2003 at lower then 128kbs bitrates only in the same site there is a test for 128+ bitrates and aac is ties with eac as the best format too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seethru Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 so by these standards I could take my cd collection and re-rip them to 160kbps aac and hear no difference from my 192kbps mp3s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
username Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 ,Oct 20 2003, 20:07] in the same site there is a test for 128+ bitrates and aac is ties with eac as the best format too he was talking about the nero HE aac codec, which is designed for best quality at lower bitrates so by these standards I could take my cd collection and re-rip them to 160kbps aac and hear no difference from my 192kbps mp3s? probably not :yes: but CBR 192 MP3 is not up to standard in my book Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron901 Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 so by these standards I could take my cd collection and re-rip them to 160kbps aac and hear no difference from my 192kbps mp3s? 128kbps AAC will do imo. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nomis_nehc Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 at this point, we're not just comparing the simple number such as bit rate. obviously 128 is more than 64, it doesn't take a 3 year old to figure out. just listen to it and you'll see for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaise Veteran Posted October 21, 2003 Veteran Share Posted October 21, 2003 Moved To The Media Room Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seethru Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 ok, next question is, is there any programs other than itunes to encode aac for windows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redestium Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 ok, next question is, is there any programs other than itunes to encode aac for windows? I just love how there are so many extensions for "aac". :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctified Veteran Posted October 21, 2003 Veteran Share Posted October 21, 2003 ok, next question is, is there any programs other than itunes to encode aac for windows? as far as I know, cdex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron901 Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 I just love how there are so many extensions for "aac". :/ lol actually how many are there? mp4, m4a.. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecander Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 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 well for starters the human ear cant even hear the full range of CD audio at 44khz...so why would it matter if a 64kbps mp4 sounded just like a 160kbps mp3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
username Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 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 well for starters the human ear cant even hear the full range of CD audio at 44khz...so why would it matter if a 64kbps mp4 sounded just like a 160kbps mp3 that?s frequency budd:whistle:e: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seethru Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 I found a few encoders, but when I checked EAC's site they recommended FAAC. I guess I'll have to give that a try when I get home. Rip one track and compare lame, itunes encoder, and faac and see if I can tell the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkmark327 Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 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. They work fine for me, that's what I use in my mp3 player and they work in winamp too As for the comparison between the different formats, the listening medium is also very important. The difference between formats/bitrates is far more pronounced on a normal/hi quality speaker system than a pair of earbuds from an mp3 player...I hate low bitrate media on the PC because it sounds like crap (128 kbps mp3, 64 kbps wma, whatever, it all sucks at that bitrate) but on the mp3 player it's tolerable. You dont' get a huge choice of file types on portable audio players, so you use what works best at the lowest bitrate, and that's wma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redestium Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 lol actually how many are there?mp4, m4a.. ? aac, m4a, m4p, mp4 as far as I know Isn't that excessive when all the other formats have just one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lilmoonee Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 aac is just the audio stream without the mpeg 4 container so its technically different. m4a and m4p is apples extention for audio so it wont get confused with mp4 which signifies the video format. cuz i dont think u want winamp to popup when u watch a video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nekrosoft13 Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 Mp4 is Mpeg-4 Movie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antipop Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 ok, next question is, is there any programs other than itunes to encode aac for windows? winamp 5 baby! :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron901 Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 lol actually how many are there?mp4, m4a.. ? aac, m4a, m4p, mp4 as far as I know Isn't that excessive when all the other formats have just one? whoa thats confusing. but i've only got .m4a here. wish it was .aac though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkstar559 Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 so what's the technical details on AC3? is it very different from AAC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
username Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 AC3 is multi channel AAC in a different container used in DVDs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seethru Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 well...I've ripped and encoded some albums, and I will say that approx a 4mb mp3 file is equal to 3mb aac file.....so 25% drop in file size with no quality loss. When you take a 10gb IPOD that has approx. 9GB on it that is a large difference. That 9GB quickly turns into roughly 7gb....WOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redestium Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 well...I've ripped and encoded some albums, and I will say that approx a 4mb mp3 file is equal to 3mb aac file.....so 25% drop in file size with no quality loss. When you take a 10gb IPOD that has approx. 9GB on it that is a large difference. That 9GB quickly turns into roughly 7gb....WOW. I love AAC, a wonderful format. (Y) :) :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron901 Posted October 21, 2003 Share Posted October 21, 2003 well...I've ripped and encoded some albums, and I will say that approx a 4mb mp3 file is equal to 3mb aac file.....so 25% drop in file size with no quality loss. When you take a 10gb IPOD that has approx. 9GB on it that is a large difference. That 9GB quickly turns into roughly 7gb....WOW. what are you talking about? 128 AAC has the same size as 128 MP3, 192 AAC has the same size as 192 MP3. unless of course you're comparing 128 AAC to 160/192 MP3... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts