Skip to main content

Topic: looking for a aac. encoder comparison test... (Read 3048 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • n68
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Banned
looking for a aac. encoder comparison test...
yup...


wondering if a comparison between those two.. are made..

also if there`s done a pure mp4. test
between those encoder`s aviable..

should be interesting reading.. me think.



looking for a aac. encoder comparison test...
Reply #1
Why not just try both and compare? Some say Nero AAC has worse pre-echo than Psytel AAC in some situations, i haven't tested this, but, i couldn't care less if i just read opinions of others. I trust my hearing, not just others'.
(I hope you're not looking for graphs or something, since graphs mean nothing)

  • guruboolez
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
looking for a aac. encoder comparison test...
Reply #2
I said it - tested with PsyTEL AAC 2.15 -archive & Ahead MP4 from Nero 5.5.100 -audiophile, on the castanet2.wav sample (find on the HA server). ABXed several time, on different moment of the day.
Precisely

  • n68
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Banned
looking for a aac. encoder comparison test...
Reply #3
Quote
Why not just try both and compare? Some say Nero AAC has worse pre-echo than Psytel AAC in some situations, i haven't tested this, but, i couldn't care less if i just read opinions of others. I trust my hearing, not just others'.
(I hope you're not looking for graphs or something, since graphs mean nothing)

yup...


now.. personaly.. i give a big ####.. about white papers.
(a set of good ears.. is all that is required.)
but in conjunction with bao. there was question about a comparison
between nero mp4.. and psytel aac..

the sample i encoded with qt.
was the worst aac sample.. i ever heard.


the award for best audio tweaker
in ** years in a row: Q-TIP