3GPP, AAC+ and Nero Encoder

[Weltall]

Hello guys, I'm not too up to date with these aac encoders, I just wanna know if there's a significantly change in one of those, talking about quality and speed, or I can stick with anyone and I'll be safe, since they are up to date? Can someone enlight me? Thanks

[fibbingbear]

The only one I know about is Nero AAC encoder. I like it a lot. It hasn't been updated in a while but it's a great one -- if it's not broken don't fix it :) You might want to consider posting on the hydrogenaudio forums for more info --- they're the Doom9 equivalent for audio encoding.

[Weltall]

Thank you, but I gotta know about each one of them. When I used Nero for the last time, it had less quality than ct aac plus, for my ears. So it hasn't been updated in a while...? Hum.. What about 3GPP (I'm using it right now) and CT AAC+? I didn't try latest CT AAC+, what about it, could someone give me a techinical exp.?

:thanks:

[roozhou]

1) 3GPP and CT AAC+ are both CBR encoders while Nero supports VBR encoding.

2) With CT AAC+ there is a "speech" option. I don't know whether this really improves encoding quality for speech.

3) Encoding speed (he-aac): CT > Nero > 3GGP (compiled with ICL)

[Weltall]

I suppose your comment is about the newest version of each one. Then I think I'll stick iwth ct, which I think is the best in quality of every 3 on every version of everyone I tried till now :D

If nero isnt update for a while, then the latest version is the one I tried (since I did 7 months ago), 3GPP is fine, but slower than CT. Ok then, thanks thanks thanks.

Edit.: I meant "technical" on the previous comment :$