Fresh build of reference Enhanced AACPlus (AACPlus v2) Codec

[bond]

With the coreaac the PS part is ignored or not?not ignored

[Jibreil]

Dimzon: Im really looking forward for the following:


To implement an interface or mux file support where we can load Six Mono WAV's and encoder with aacPlus v2 for a 5.1 channel output.
Encoder to support 6 channels instead of just 5.
Encoder to support Wave Ext. Format Header

[Jibreil]

Well, at least nero announced that they will add AAC Plus v2 support in this year, I'm wondering when Apple will add support for this......
anyway, actually what are the decoder that can understand AAC+HE+PS?
EDIT: anyway, tnx for all your useful build and tools, Dimzon. I'm living an hard time waiting for Nero AAC Plus 2.

If you've downloaded WinAmp 5.1. Go to the Plugins folder, you will find the in_mp4.dll file there.

[bond]

very interesting quality comparison between helix, codingtech and nero he-/ps-aac:

http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=707673#post707673
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=36868

[bond]

Sources (http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/26410.htm)I've developed a CLI codec for Enhanced AACPlus, aka AACPlus v2, aka AAC+SBR+PS using the reference encoder sourcecode provided by Coding Technologies.ok so it seems coding technologies released the sourcecode for their ps-aac encoder as opensource for the 3gpp reference encoder here:
http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/html-info/26410.htm

but now my questions:
- is it sure that the 3gpp reference is from coding technologies?
- is the 3gpp reference the same or a different encoder than the one coding technologies sells?

would be happy if someone knows an answer to this :)

IF the 3gpp code and the one coding technologies sells is the same, why do we need to mess around with winamp and stuff like that?
simply pack the code into a nice standalone commandline encoder