mp3HD - a new lossless audio codec

[Kurtnoise]

I don't believe this...:eek:

mp3HD Overview


mp3HD is a lossless audio codec (100% bit-exact replica of CD tracks)
Backward Compatible to mp3
File extension .mp3
Bitrates for music approximately 500 to 900 kbps rates (similar to other lossless codecs), depending on genre
Embedded mp3 track and the mp3HD file share the same id3 metadata
Encoding parameters (e.g. bit rate), ancillary data and meta data of embedded mp3 track are under control




The following tools are avaialble immediately for your tests:


* Encoding
o Command-line encoder
* Decoding (to wav)
o Command-line decoder
* Playing
o Plug-in for Winamp (for Winamp 5.5 and above)
* Platforms
o Win32 (Microsoft Windows XP, 2000, NT 4, Me/98), Vista
o Linux32
* Support
o CD audio (PCM): 44.1, 48 kHz sampling rate, 16 bit/sample
* Software Downloads Page (http://www.all4mp3.com/Software3.aspx)



http://www.all4mp3.com/Learn_mp3_hd_1.aspx


******************************************************************************
* *
* mp3HD Commandline Encoder V1.4.0 *
* (Evaluation Version) *
* *
* Revision 1007 *
* Build Jan 30 2009 *
* *
* (c) 2007 - 2009 Thomson S.A. *
* (c) 1996 - 2009 Fraunhofer IIS *
* All rights reserved. *
* *
* This software and/or program is protected by copyright law and *
* international treaties. Any reproduction or distribution of *
* this software and/or program, or any portion of it, may result *
* in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted *
* to the maximum extent possible under law. *
* *
******************************************************************************

Usage: ./mp3hdEncoder [-if infile] [-of outfile] [-br Birate] [options]

-if infile:
A 1 channel or 2 channel wave input file.
-of outfile:
The destination mp3HD bitstream file.
-br Bitrate
The MP3 bitrate in bits/sec

[options]:
-mode <0-5>
Encoder mode (0 = CBR, 1 = VBR highest quality, 5 = VBR lowest
bit rate) <default: CBR>
For all VBR modes the bitrate switch '-br' has to be set to '0'
VBR mode 5 is disabled for infiles with 48 kHz samplerate.
-id3in id3File
The id3File can contain an ID3V1.x and an ID3V2.3 or an ID3V2.4 tag.
The ID3 tags are copied into the mp3HD file.
The ID3V2.X tag has to be at the beginning of the file.
The ID3V1.x tag has to be at the end of the file.
Add ID3 tags directly:
(Ignored in combination with the "-id3in" option)
-Title "[title string]"
-Artist "[artist string]"
-Album "[album string]"
-Track "[track number]"
-Length "[length in ms]"
-Year "[year string]"
-Genre "[content type]"
-Encoder "[encoded by ..]"
-Encoder_Settings "[encoder name and settings]"
-pic jpegFile
The jpegFile must contain an jpeg picture.
The picture is copied into the mp3HD file.
-com "[Text]"
Adds a comment text into the mp3HD info frame.
-quiet
Standard output of only one line

Example: ./mp3hdEncoder -br 128000 -if test.wav -of test.mp3

[HymnToLife]

Ran a quick test on Beethoven's Fifth, not very impressive.

Source WAV: 336 MB
FLAC (default settings): 142 MB
mp3HD: 175 MB

It is also much slower... The backward-compatibility might be interesting, though, anyone tried to use that in an AVI?

[shon3i]

Backward comactibilty here is only good thing i think. i don't know why they still force old technologies like DTS/AC3 and now MP3.

[Inspector.Gadget]

With regard to backwards compatibility, is it set up to be two streams like TrueHD+AC3?

[turbojet]

With regard to backwards compatibility, is it set up to be two streams like TrueHD+AC3?

Ya, it seems like you can encode to mp3HD and use it on external mp3 players, at least the ones I've tried, but there is about a second delay before the file starts playing.

If it decodes to wav in external players but is about half the size of the original CD this could be pretty interesting for people playing on mp3 players that don't support other lossless formats.

If it decodes the mp3 in external players it would be nice to be able to extract the mp3 from the mp3HD at least. However I don't see how this could be any more beneficial then encoding from a smaller lossless file except for saving the time to encode.

[Inspector.Gadget]

Well, thus far in my extremely unscientific testing, decoded MP3-HDs are bit-identical to the original WAVs from which they were created. FYI, foobar2000 reports an mp3-HD encoded with -br 192000 as "192 VBR" even though as far as I know this encoder uses CBR where -br is specified.

[Alex-Kid]

Interesting. Specially for lossless audio movies.

o Plug-in for Winamp (for Winamp 5.5 and above)
Why should I use any other plug-in if it's backward compatible to mp3? I hope this refers to and encoding plug-in.

[turbojet]

It might be encoding plugin too, I don't use winamp and I don't feel like testing it out.

But if it's only a decoding plugin it could be that it plays lossless while other mp3 plugins play it as a lossy mp3.

It's kind of strange because it has the lossy mp3 headers but the size doesn't match the headers at all since it's lossless.

I wish there was some documentation on how it's decoded. It would either really spark my interest or write it off.

[Dark Shikari]

Do we really need more lossless audio formats?

We already have like 20-30 of them.

[turbojet]

A lossless format that's considerably smaller then pcm and can play can play virtually everywhere? Yes, at least I do!

I'm not sure that's what this is though.

This could be something completely different from the rest, otherwise I'd say nope.

[Dark Shikari]

A lossless format that's considerably smaller then pcm and can play can play virtually everywhere?

You mean FLAC? Or APE? Or SLS? Or ALS? Or ALAC? Or WMA9 Lossless? Or MLP? Or PAC? Or LA? Or Real Lossless? Or DTS-HD Master Audio? Or TTA? Or OptimFrog? Or Shorten? Or RK? Or LiteWave? Or TAK? Or PCA? Or Dakx? Or WavPack? Or... ;)


I did say there were too many formats...

[turbojet]

Outside of FLAC which has a little hardware support, those formats won't even play outside your computer. At least on your typical DVD/CD player or your portable mp3 player.

But according to this (http://www.macworld.co.uk/digitallifestyle/news/index.cfm?newsid=25467) "Existing MP3 players will read only the standard MP3 information; only MP3HD players will benefit from the additional lossless information stored in the file." If this is true it will lose my interest.

However if MP3hd players start selling and there becomes a decent selection I may be interested again.

Then you could almost compare this to BD's that play in standard dvd players. (http://www.tomshardware.com/news/blu-ray-hd-dvd-combo,6721.html) Which I think would have been a huge hit from the gitgo, even if they started retailing now at current BD prices I still think it would give BD a big boost.

[menno]

Note that the "backwards compatible with MP3" means that it is lossy on normal MP3 decoders. You need a mp3HD decoder to actually have it decode as lossless. This is simply the MP3 version of HD AAC (MPEG-4 SLS).

[shon3i]

Note that the "backwards compatible with MP3" means that it is lossy on normal MP3 decoders. You need a mp3HD decoder to actually have it decode as lossless. This is simply the MP3 version of HD AAC (MPEG-4 SLS).
exactly, rather than to improve support for the AAC, they improve the old formats :(

LC-AAC = MP3
HE-AAC = MP3Pro
HD-AAC=MP3HD


I did say there were too many formats...You forgot TrueHD ;)

[Dark Shikari]

You forgot TrueHD ;)No, I said MLP.

[shon3i]

sorry i don't see it :)

[DJ Bobo]

I can certainly see the benefit of this technology with portable players: you get "normal" MP3 quality when played in the portable player and CD-quality when played on the PC, using the same file.
So it's not that bad an idea (why encode everything twice?).
It's also welcome because not many portable players support AAC decoding.

BUT! I don't see any benefit with movies. Movies usually come with 5.1 soundtracks, which are smaller in the AC3 form than a losslessly compressed stereo file, so...

[HymnToLife]

So it's not that bad an idea (why encode everything twice?).


Since both the resulting file size and the encoding time are larger, the benefits of having to encode just once are not obvious... Not to mention that the mp3HD stream will be useless when you will store the file on your MP3 player, but will still eat a lot of diskspace.

[TinTime]

Since both the resulting file size and the encoding time are larger, the benefits of having to encode just once are not obvious... Not to mention that the mp3HD stream will be useless when you will store the file on your MP3 player, but will still eat a lot of diskspace.

I agree. For my own encoding I'll just encode to flac and mp3. It doesn't take that long and I've no desire to fill up my mp3 player with lossless files.

That said I can imagine this might have an application in the music download market. If you can offer a single mp3 track that will satisfy those looking for lossless quality (a fairly small market) as well as allowing standard mp3 compatibility for everyone else then it could yet be a winner.

[DJ Bobo]

but will still eat a lot of diskspace.
This is the downside of course.
May be they can come up with a tool that can copy only the compressed part on the fly?
I guess that would make everybody happy.

[turbojet]

I much prefer they took this fresh approach then try to do something with AAC. After all what is a software company supposed to do with AAC that hasn't been done anyways?

If there becomes a market of MP3HD hardware I can see this really taking off.

I would probably be using this regularly from now if there was a way to extract the compressed mp3 but for now I'll say with FLAC and lame mp3 as well.

[SeeMoreDigital]

I much prefer they took this fresh approach then try to do something with AAC. After all what is a software company supposed to do with AAC that hasn't been done anyways? Lossless MP3 is an interesting idea technically but personally I can't see much use for it....

Love-it or loath-it, AAC offers greater encoding flexibility and given that it's now supported by cell phone manufacturers, its popularity can only increase....

[turbojet]

I'm neutral on AAC, I prefer the higher efficiency over mp3 and the 5.1 support which mp3 (aud-x) really lacks. However I don't like that I don't own any hardware outside of computers that plays it.

We'll see where AAC goes, it does have some good backing but it's got a goliath in mp3 to compete with.

As for higher efficiency affecting the market, the majority of the public still see's no (to very little) difference between dvd and bd, which is a much bigger difference then aac vs mp3 efficiency. Then again not many can tell a difference between mp3 and cd either.

[menno]

Since both the resulting file size and the encoding time are larger, the benefits of having to encode just once are not obvious... Not to mention that the mp3HD stream will be useless when you will store the file on your MP3 player, but will still eat a lot of diskspace.

The trick is that you can strip the file from the lossless correction data and end up with a pure MP3 file, much faster than encoding your lossless file to MP3. The correction data is stored in an ID3v2 tag frame (ugly hack), so probably a tag editor should be able to remove that.