Nero AAC and FAAC, which is better in same quality/bitrate encode?

[bxyhxyh]

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.

[Przemek_Sperling]

Nero AAC is more advanced. FAAC is pretty basic.

[Atak_Snajpera]

apple aac or fraunhofer aac (the same institute invented mp3) are even a little bit better.

[LoRd_MuldeR]

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...

[nibus]

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.

[Atak_Snajpera]

using good headphones for me even fhg lc aac 128 kbps is transparent

[Przemek_Sperling]

Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera

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.

[poisondeathray]

Originally Posted by Przemek_Sperling

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

[smok3]

Originally Posted by poisondeathray

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.

[IgorC]

Originally Posted by Atak_Snajpera

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.

[Asmodian]

Originally Posted by IgorC

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.

[smok3]

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.

[IgorC]

Originally Posted by Asmodian

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.

[Asmodian]

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.

[Remicade]

For a DTS transcoding what to choose between AC3 Aften 448 kb and Nero AAC LC 320 kb adaptive ?

[nibus]

Originally Posted by Remicade

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.

[turab]

Originally Posted by Remicade

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.

[Remicade]

Could I use Apple encoder in Megui ? I read here AAC is better then AC3.

[turab]

Originally Posted by Remicade

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.