AAC with SBC (aac+)

[gino25]

I read on hydrogenaudio about this format.

But I have founded no encoder or direct-show decoder.

are they exist?

[JohnV]

The first encoder will become available with Nero6 on July 18th.
FAAD2 will have SBR support so you can except DirectShow decoders based on it (like CoreAAC) to include deocoding support.

[bond]

i cant wait anymore to see if aac+ will be usable @64kbps (comparable quality to vorbis @96kbps) for 1cd rips :D

[gino25]

thank you

[Sirber]

Originally posted by bond
i cant wait anymore to see if aac+ will be usable @64kbps (comparable quality to vorbis @96kbps) for 1cd rips :D Would be great. :D

[iwod]

ON a current test sample, 64 Kbps for AAC+ , which is AAC with SBR, and now offically named by Nero as HE-AAC ( High effiecny AAC )
sounds better than ANY codec in 64 Kbps.

I do hope it sounds better than 128 Mp3 as well. Then i can dup all those mp3s files.

[unplugged]

If I'm not wrong, SBR approach (the "plus" in AAC+) is mostly valid for music content, otherwise there is no gain in bitrate efficiency.
If so I don't see particular interest for use with CD rips except for AAC 5.1, or AAC itself... that is valid even without SBR :)

[Sirber]

AAC+ is like mp3PRO, almost the same technology.

[Sgt_Strider]

Originally posted by Sirber
AAC+ is like mp3PRO, almost the same technology.

You mean the SBR part though right? Cuz AAC and MP3 are very different technologies.

[Sirber]

I mean SBR. :D

and I like the results.

[SeeMoreDigital]

There should be no doubt in anybodies minds. AAC+ (SBR) should sound better than Mp3pro (SBR).

If you use the base codec as a starting point, it's already acknowledged that AAC sounds better than Mp3 at 64kbps. So it makes sense that adding SBR (Spectural Band Replacement) will enhance AAC further!

Which is a shame, because I like the idea of Mp3pro!

[Sirber]

I'll see when AAC+ will be ready. Don't say "A is better than B" when A isn't out wet. Also, mp3PRO have portable hardware playbak. Can you say that about AAC?

[SeeMoreDigital]

Sirber,

Well yes. Quite a few Panasonic devices have AAC playback and if you were over here in the UK you could listen to AAC all day via DAB radio.

[kaede]

hmm.. ive been trying to gather info on the codec and i cant seem to find a confirmation that it will do VBR HE-AAC.

i have seen it in some beta screens of the product (altho i treat most screens -- especially beta as fakes untill i get my hand on it)

it would b a real shame if there wasnt VBR support in the AAC codec.. CBR is so wastefull..

can anyone enlighten me?

[Teegedeck]

There is VBR-support, rest assured. Search on www.hydrogenaudio.org (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org) if you are looking for more information.

[midiguy]

Originally posted by iwod
ON a current test sample, 64 Kbps for AAC+ , which is AAC with SBR, and now offically named by Nero as HE-AAC ( High effiecny AAC )
sounds better than ANY codec in 64 Kbps.

I do hope it sounds better than 128 Mp3 as well. Then i can dup all those mp3s files.

Not a good idea! Different audio formats work on different algorithms and thus take out different information. So if you recompress an audio file (espeically to a different format that is in no way similar), not only are you losing the information taken out by the mp3 algorithm, but also by the AAC+ algorithm. This will result in a severe loss of quality. I hope that makes sense...

Unless you meant to say "dump" and "dup" was just a typo :D

[gino25]

will be possible 5.1 aac+?

[ChristianHJW]

Originally posted by gino25
will be possible 5.1 aac+?

Yes ....

[unmei]

sure AAC-HE will be VBR - AAC alone is VBR from the beginning (i think even only VBR/ABR, no CBR option) and i dont think Ahead were stupid enough to turn that into CBR ^^

[SeeMoreDigital]

It will be interesting to see how low, in kbps, AAC+ 6Ch surround audio files will be.

For WMA9 6Ch, the lowest setting is 128kbps @ 44.1kHz. Which generates files approx 60% smaller than many DVD AC3 audio streams.

I have not tested RMA9 surround audio codec yet!

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by unmei
sure AAC-HE will be VBR - AAC alone is VBR from the beginning (i think even only VBR/ABR, no CBR option) and i dont think Ahead were stupid enough to turn that into CBR ^^

Actually there is a CBR mode. But AAC unlike MP3 IIRC was designed from the ground up with VBR in mind. I have been told that the AAC songs purchased from Apple's store are CBR AAC. Though to date in the realm of CBR AAC encoders Quicktime AAC is king. So no big worries as of yet. VBR is undoubtedly the future though. Though AAC may or may not be. We will just have to wait and see what AAC's future will be.

[gino25]

Nero 6 will be releases tomorrow. We will can try the new aac+.

I hope there will be a direct-show filter that support sbr

[iwod]

Originally posted by midiguy
Not a good idea! Different audio formats work on different algorithms and thus take out different information. So if you recompress an audio file (espeically to a different format that is in no way similar), not only are you losing the information taken out by the mp3 algorithm, but also by the AAC+ algorithm. This will result in a severe loss of quality. I hope that makes sense...

Unless you meant to say "dump" and "dup" was just a typo :D

This is called transcoding. I know. I never said that i am going to transcode my mp3s file. I mean i am going to rerips my cds to HE AAC.........

And i heard they are putting the code of HE aac into some sort of liscenses........... i will have to read up more about this.......

[DKDIB]

Gino wrote:
> [...] We will can try the new aac+.
> I hope there will be a direct-show filter that support sbr

NeroVision Express 2.0 includes a DS filter called "aacplus.dll": it decodes both AAC & HE-AAC.
Probably also CoreAAC will support HE-AAC ASAP.

[dillee1]

Originally posted by gino25
Nero 6 will be releases tomorrow. We will can try the new aac+.

I hope there will be a direct-show filter that support sbr


There is a dshow filter "neaudio.ax". However it seems like you can't load it anywhere except in nero wave edit. This means that you can't mux it with video and play around yet.

The quailty of HE AAC is truely stunning. 55k aac+ sounds like 128k mp3 :devil:

[bond]

Originally posted by DKDIB
NeroVision Express 2.0 includes a DS filter called "aacplus.dll": it decodes both AAC & HE-AAC.so you can decode a he-aac file in graphedit by using this aacplus.dll?

[DKDIB]

Obviously I' m not sure, but seems that it' s a DS filter.
I found DLL' s name & description here (http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?postid=2427136).

[Animaniac]

Originally posted by dillee1
There is a dshow filter "neaudio.ax". However it seems like you can't load it anywhere except in nero wave edit. This means that you can't mux it with video and play around yet.

The quailty of HE AAC is truely stunning. 55k aac+ sounds like 128k mp3 :devil:

Chances are they use a different mediatype than 3ivx and CoreAAC. There's no raw AAC parser filter. I wonder if they have an MP4 parser filter of their own. Maybe it can be forced to be used using MPC's awesome filter management system. Maybe I'll install Nero Vision 2... >.> ... <.< ... >.> ... tomorrow...

[gino25]

Has someone tried this new format?

[Sirber]

Originally posted by dillee1
The quailty of HE AAC is truely stunning. 55k aac+ sounds like 128k mp3 :devil: Vorbis, mp3PRO and cook at ~64kbps sounds like MP3 at 128kbps or more. Why is that so special?

[JohnV]

Originally posted by Sirber
Vorbis, mp3PRO and cook at ~64kbps sounds like MP3 at 128kbps or more. Why is that so special? First of all Vorbis and MP3pro nor HE AAC sound like the best MP3 at 128kbps you can produce, but Ahead HE AAC is the best sounding codec at low bitrates, and it should be so by rather clear margin to Vorbis for example (which could be seen in over 95% significance in group blind testing, although so far there has been only one such test which was rather small both regarding participants and samples)

[Nic]

"Vorbis, mp3PRO and cook at ~64kbps sounds like MP3 at 128kbps or more"
?!?!!?!

Wow, you must hear things very different to me. But, Audio is even more subjective than video I suppose....

-Nic

[symonjfox]

AFAIK AAC+ has many many differences from MP3Pro.

1 AAC+ delivers very good quality at 56 kbs.
2 At higher bitrates, some tests show that AAC+ has a better frequency response over AAC and MP3(Pro)
3 A 6 channel AAC+ low bitrate encode will very very useful for our MPEG 4 Xvid/DivX encodes in MPEG4/Matroska container.

An advice: never believe to commercial slogans: 64 kbs MP3Pro has nothing to do with a 128 kbs ABR Lame MP3 encode. The frequency respose is different in both formats ...

[vinouz]

Still have to see for myself what AAC+ sounds like. Where can it be seen ? Is there an announcement website with samples to hear ?
And nero is pushed back to 25th of july...

(although this 'recode' novelty seems like it can be interesting. Would it be an automated tool to encode to he-aac ????)

I see many people talking about the quality, but can't find anywhere to hear for myself, so I ask, where ?

[SeeMoreDigital]

I think that we are also forgetting that the quality of the encoded sound file can vary a great deal depending on the player thats used.

Even a full .wav file can sound quite different when played via WMP9, MusicMatch, WinAmp etc.

I read on the Nero website that their new media player will playback AAC/AAC+, Mp3/pro etc but the previous incarnation of their media player sounded dreadfull. Well to my ears anyway!

So who knows what audio codec will sound best, and in which player!

[vinouz]

Remove the equalizer ;) .

[bond]

Originally posted by vinouz
And nero is pushed back to 25th of july...:devil:

[ominte]

Originally posted by JohnV
First of all Vorbis and MP3pro nor HE AAC sound like the best MP3 at 128kbps you can produce
That's an interesting statement because it seems to contradict the general consensus that ogg is better quality than mp3 at 128 kbps and below in most situations. Unless I somehow misunderstood your statement :D. Also AAC is reportedly better than mp3 at all bitrates.

[Sirber]

From my tests, vorbis and AAC sound amazing at 128kbps. mp3PRO is a little behing them (when testing at 96kbps).

[symonjfox]

IMHO MP3Pro @ 64/80 kbs creates a frequency gap between Mid-High and High. I could hear it in many cases. It surely produce better quality than standard MP3 @ 80 kbs.

Instead, from the web pages I read about AAC+, this format won't leave any gap. I can't test it now, but when something more will be avaiable I'll try it for sure.

[SeeMoreDigital]

symonjfox

I mostly agree with your statement...

IMHO MP3Pro @ 64/80 kbs creates a frequency gap between Mid-High and High. I could hear it in many cases. It surely produce better quality than standard MP3 @ 80 kbs.

... but this frequency gap can also be down to the player used. In my opinion the WinAmp player is not very good at all with Mp3pro and there are stark musical differences between the MusicMatch and RCA players.

And there's nothing wrong with your english!

[Sirber]

Tombson mp3PRO plugin isn't very good IMO, for normal MP3 and mp3PRO. It miss some freq.

[SeeMoreDigital]

Hi Sirber

Yes if you mean the Thomson Mp3pro plugin for applications such as WinAmp then you are correct.

The Thomson stand alone player/encoder is quite a bit better. But the best out of the bunch is MusicMatch (to my ears anyway).

Which I know you don't like too much!

[JohnV]

Originally posted by ominte
That's an interesting statement because it seems to contradict the general consensus that ogg is better quality than mp3 at 128 kbps and below in most situations. Is general consensus here is that Vorbis 64kbps nominal is better than the best mp3 128 (Lame alt-preset 128 or some FhG)?
That is a very weird general consensus then.. :D

Vorbis 64 reduces the stereo image considerably, which should be an issue also for movie freaks. Also Vorbis 64 can produce remarkable artifacting with quiet classical music, which is often background music in movies (see ff123's 64kbps test specific samples)

[iwod]

Hi JohnV,

Nice to get one more Audio Pros from Hydrogen to here.... although most of you don't post much :D

Slightly off topic. For those who want to get the bet quality should try MPC ( not media player classic as refreed in Doom9, but Musepack....) The best lossy format.

HE AAC does not sounds better than the best produce 128 Mp3??
I was always hoping with the advance technique in AAC and SBR we could surely come into the day where 64Kbps sounds better than 128Kbps... may be i have to wait for SV8 to do the miricle again......

But surely there is still alot of room for tuning on HE AAC, and what about Vobris 1.1??

[kaede]

erm.. i think he was reffering to
mp3(128) > vorbis (64) sound quality

have to wait and see where HE-AAC will fit in (the 25th). altho there are a few warez copies of nero6 floating around, im ignoring them. If Ahead puts in the effort to make a decent product with support for new codecs ill buy it.

[symonjfox]

OT

Originally posted by SeeMoreDigital
And there's nothing wrong with your english!
Thanks :D

[ominte]

@ JohnV

I completely understand that a 64kbps ogg vorbis is no match for mp3 at 128kbps :D . But what I suggested is that bit for bit ogg vorbis is a more accurate compressor (below 128kbps ofcourse).

Actually, I remember either Garf or one of the ogg devs on hydrogen audio suggesting that ogg at 112kbps is equivalent to mp3 at 128kbps.

[ChristianHJW]

Originally posted by ominte Actually, I remember either Garf or one of the ogg devs on hydrogen audio suggesting that ogg at 112kbps is equivalent to mp3 at 128kbps.

IMHO you need Lame VBR and a MP3 friendly sample to state this, but this is just IMHO. Interesting enough, everybody will confirm that this gap becomes bigger the lower the actual bitrate is, say a 64 kbps Vorbis track sounds comparable to 86 kbps Lame VBR MP3 track ...

[kaede]

Originally posted by ominte
@ JohnV

I completely understand that a 64kbps ogg vorbis is no match for mp3 at 128kbps :D . But what I suggested is that bit for bit ogg vorbis is a more accurate compressor (below 128kbps ofcourse).

Actually, I remember either Garf or one of the ogg devs on hydrogen audio suggesting that ogg at 112kbps is equivalent to mp3 at 128kbps.

oh for sure, that i totally agree with, ogg definetly has a better compression algorythm and greater dynamic range at the same bitrates