Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion.

Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules.

 

Go Back   Doom9's Forum > General > Newbies

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 2nd May 2012, 05:22   #1  |  Link
bxyhxyh
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 326
Nero AAC and FAAC, which is better in same quality/bitrate encode?

I am newbie for audio encoding. So posted here.

Nero AAC and FAAC, which is better in same quality/bitrate encode? i don't know about these by details.

and sorry for my bad english.
bxyhxyh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2012, 07:02   #2  |  Link
Przemek_Sperling
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Poland
Posts: 120
Nero AAC is more advanced. FAAC is pretty basic.
Przemek_Sperling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2012, 08:09   #3  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 6,079
apple aac or fraunhofer aac (the same institute invented mp3) are even a little bit better.

Last edited by Atak_Snajpera; 2nd May 2012 at 08:14.
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd May 2012, 21:28   #4  |  Link
LoRd_MuldeR
Software Developer
 
LoRd_MuldeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Last House on Slunk Street
Posts: 12,756
FAAC doesn't even support HE-AAC. At low bitrates this is a clear disadvantage compared to the other encoders mentioned.

Also, as far as I know, the development of FAAC is pretty much dead...
__________________
There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.
How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.


LoRd_MuldeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 04:28   #5  |  Link
nibus
Telewhining
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 275
My personal opinion:

12-32kbps (HEv2) - Nero/FhG
32-48kbps (HE) - FhG
48-64kbps (HE) - Apple QuickTime
96-192kbps (LC) - Apple QuickTime

Any bitrates above that and they'll be indistinguishable.
nibus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 10:15   #6  |  Link
Atak_Snajpera
RipBot264 author
 
Atak_Snajpera's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Poland
Posts: 6,079
using good headphones for me even fhg lc aac 128 kbps is transparent
Atak_Snajpera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 16:49   #7  |  Link
Przemek_Sperling
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Poland
Posts: 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
using good headphones for me even fhg lc aac 128 kbps is transparent
Well, it "the point of transparency" depends mainly on two things:
1. how good you are in listening to the music and individual factors
2. what kind material you use for comaprisons, because some codecs are better in encoding some specific material than others


You can make some training, e.g. Vorbis has problems with pre-echo and rock guitars like The Cult, Brygada Kryzys, etc.
Przemek_Sperling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 17:48   #8  |  Link
poisondeathray
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,902
Quote:
Originally Posted by Przemek_Sperling View Post
Well, it "the point of transparency" depends mainly on two things:
1. how good you are in listening to the music and individual factors
2. what kind material you use for comaprisons, because some codecs are better in encoding some specific material than others


You can make some training, e.g. Vorbis has problems with pre-echo and rock guitars like The Cult, Brygada Kryzys, etc.
3. type and quality of equipment. e.g you might not be able to as easily discern differences with low quality headphones or speakers
poisondeathray is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th May 2012, 19:34   #9  |  Link
smok3
brontosaurusrex
 
smok3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by poisondeathray View Post
you might not be able to as easily discern differences with low quality headphones or speakers
probably quite the opposite, if you think that "hi-quality" is linear response (and the codecs are probably tuned to that direction), but i don't have any black on white evidence either.
__________________
certain other member
smok3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th May 2012, 04:46   #10  |  Link
IgorC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera View Post
apple aac or fraunhofer aac (the same institute invented mp3) are even a little bit better.
Saying that Apple is a little bit better than Nero is the same as saying that x264 is a little bit better than Divx H.264.
IgorC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th May 2012, 19:19   #11  |  Link
Asmodian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 2,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by IgorC View Post
Saying that Apple is a little bit better than Nero is the same as saying that x264 is a little bit better than Divx H.264.
Does that apply to higher bit-rates? At >140kbps stereo I have been unable to tell them apart myself and I have not found a review or comparison where they used bit rates I would consider using.
Asmodian is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2012, 19:14   #12  |  Link
smok3
brontosaurusrex
 
smok3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 2,359
Asmodian, i found both nero and apple basically transparent at around 100 kbits (2ch movie soundtracks), probably you would need to go a bit higher with music.

p.s. however that doesn't tell much, since I'am not young anymore and no golden ears either.
__________________
certain other member
smok3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2012, 21:18   #13  |  Link
IgorC
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian View Post
Does that apply to higher bit-rates? At >140kbps stereo I have been unable to tell them apart myself and I have not found a review or comparison where they used bit rates I would consider using.
Those are results for 100 kbps
http://listening-tests.hydrogenaudio...96-a/index.htm

When it comes to higher bitrate it's personal and depends of a lot factors.
There are pretty old public tests.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codec_listening_test

Yes, they're old but Apple encoder was always the best encoder in those AAC tests. And the last public AAC test also prooves it's true at 100 kbps.


There is also a good tester Kamedo2. He has tested AAC encoders http://d.hatena.ne.jp/kamedo2/20111029/1319840519

qaac is Apple AAC.
IgorC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th May 2012, 19:43   #14  |  Link
Asmodian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 2,471
Great! Thanks for the information. I had not seen Kamedo2's results.

Also while not sounding bad in any way I do not consider 100kbps, with Nero at least, to be transparent. Some complex sounds sound slightly different just not human voice and simple sounds.

Last edited by Asmodian; 14th May 2012 at 19:46.
Asmodian is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2012, 06:08   #15  |  Link
Remicade
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Romania
Posts: 98
For a DTS transcoding what to choose between AC3 Aften 448 kb and Nero AAC LC 320 kb adaptive ?
Remicade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2012, 11:19   #16  |  Link
nibus
Telewhining
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remicade View Post
For a DTS transcoding what to choose between AC3 Aften 448 kb and Nero AAC LC 320 kb adaptive ?
Those will sound pretty much the same. I would go with whatever is more compatible; or if size matters, go with AAC to save space.
nibus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2012, 17:05   #17  |  Link
turab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remicade View Post
For a DTS transcoding what to choose between AC3 Aften 448 kb and Nero AAC LC 320 kb adaptive ?
The only reason I can think of for choosing AC3 over AAC is compatibility. Also, does it have to be Nero AAC? It looks like Apple's encoder is superior.
turab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2012, 18:50   #18  |  Link
Remicade
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Romania
Posts: 98
Could I use Apple encoder in Megui ? I read here AAC is better then AC3.
Remicade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2012, 20:40   #19  |  Link
turab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Remicade View Post
Could I use Apple encoder in Megui ? I read here AAC is better then AC3.
A quick search returns this: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index...12&atid=798479

In other words, not yet.
turab is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
faac neroaac

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 18:21.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.