NCTU-AAC Ver 1.0 RC1

[bobsc]

http://psplab.csie.nctu.edu.tw/projects/index.pl/nctu-aac-download.html

[tiki4]

Thanks for the link.

tiki4

[Selur]

does anyone know if and when the final will appear?
(was scheduled for may 23th)

Cu Selur

[Selur]

release date changed:
NCTU-AAC v1.0 GM will be released on 7/31/2004.

now there's a updated:
http://psplab.csie.nctu.edu.tw/projects/index.pl/nctu-aacv1.0gm.html

Main changes in v1.0 from RC2 includes
New Psychoacoustic model
New window switch mechanism and window bit allocation algorithm.
New TNS algorithm.
The combination mechanism for M/S, Window Switch and TNS.
New Bit Reservoir.
New MS coding.
New PNS algorithm
Code Optimization to have faster Speed.

no download atm, but if we are lucky it'll come :D

Cu Selur

[Selur]

Final is out, at the end of the page:
http://psplab.csie.nctu.edu.tw/projects/index.pl/nctu-aacv1.0gm.html

Got no time to test it atm, so would be nice if someone could test it and report.

Cu Selur

[E-Male]

it only takes waves as input
does it also take 5.1 waves?

[JohnV]

Originally posted by Selur
Final is out, at the end of the page:
http://psplab.csie.nctu.edu.tw/projects/index.pl/nctu-aacv1.0gm.html

Got no time to test it atm, so would be nice if someone could test it and report.

Cu Selur
This definitely needs real life listening testing.
NCTU's claims are based on PEAQ-basic odg values on something like 12 samples. Same testing method gave long time ago Vorbis 1.0 encodes positive (+) odg-values, which would mean Vorbis was better than original back then..

I'll do some testing and post some comparison samples as well. If, like they claim are better than QT 6.3 at 128kbps, they have made enourmous quality gains since RC2.. At the moment I'm skeptic about that.

[JohnV]

My first impressions on default settings for 128kbps is that it's not very high quality (surprise surprise). But I'm not sure if they used the default settings on their (PEAQ) tests or not.
I'm asking on their forum which settings they used for their tests with their encoder, then I can comment more.

[DoC hEx]

So does it Support 5.1 Surround Sound or am I still going to be using NERO??? :confused:

[JohnV]

OK, NCTU claims here (http://psplab.csie.nctu.edu.tw/projects/index.pl/nctu-aacv1.0gm.html), that their new 1.0 encoder is better than QT and Nero, based on PEAQ-basic odg value software measurements with 12(?) samples.

Here's some real life proof that NCTU is not that good as they claim, and it would be probably ranked lower than QT and Nero in real life 128kbps group listening test.

This is the first 10 sample package which shows clearly worse problems with NCTU 1.0 than than with QT and Nero encoded equivalents. Judge for yourself if their claims of being the best AAC encoder can be true...
Encoders used were latest QT and Nero with default 128kbps cbr settings, and NCTU-AAC 1.0 GM with settings (http://psplab.csie.nctu.edu.tw/invboard1_2/index.php?showtopic=2577&view=findpost&p=6313) used in their odg measurements for 128kbps.

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/stuff/PackageA.zip (8 MB)
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/stuff/PackageA_Originals.zip (18.5 MB)

I'll post more samples soon for further proof.

[JohnV]

There's some more discussion on Hydrogenaudio about this here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=25129&view=findpost&p=235519).

[Selur]

thx for the link, so it would have been nice to have another good aac encoder ;)

Cu Selur