can cook real 10 old audio codec do better then aac

[gavo]

I just wondering if say cook outprefars aac real 10 audio codec at low bitrates still or has aac surpised it. Also wondering if new real 10 aac codec get updated with realplayer.

[Tommy Carrot]

It might outperform aac-lc (low complexity - this is what generally known as aac) at low bitrates, but sure as hell beaten by aac-he, not to mention the latest revision with parametric stereo.

[Sirber]

HE-AAC > COOK at 64kbps and more. Wish HE-AAC could go bellow 64kbps...

[Tommy Carrot]

I don't know what you mean, i can go down to ~20 kbit at 44khz with nero (it's totally unlistenable, but possible).

[Sirber]

I'm talking about real audio codecs ;)

[Tommy Carrot]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but i do not think realnetworks has he-aac codec, only lc-aac.

[Sirber]

I'm correcting you coz you're wrong :p

RealAudio 10:

AAC
HE-AAC

How to check? Encode and playback using CoreAAC filter. You'll see it's 22050hz boosted to 44100hz :)

[RadicalEd]

Yeah, racp really needs to get down below 64kbps. Also, last time I tested, cook sounded a lot better than nero's he-aac at extremely low bitrates. AAC gets all scratchy, cook, like RV, stays mushy :|

[bond]

gavo, before starting a new thread, plz use search

if you would have done so, you would have found this:
http://www.rjamorim.com/test/64test/plot12z.png

there you see that at 64kbps lc-aac (qt) is on par qualitywise with realaudio cook and far worse than he-aac (nero)