Skip to main content

Topic: AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal) (Read 24221 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Comparisons:
1. HE-AAC: Apple vs Nero  (64 kbps)
2. Apple LC-AAC vs Apple HE-AAC vs Vorbis (80 kbps)
3. LAME (130 kbps) vs others.

Encoders
1) Lame 3.98.2 -V5.9 (~130-135 kbps). Mainly as high anchor.
2) Aotuv b5.7[20090301] -q1.05 (~80-85 kbps)
3) itunes 9.0.0.70 (constrained VBR, 44100 Hz, stereo):
    3a) LC-AAC 80 kbps
    3b) HE-AAC 80 kbps
    3c) HE-AAC 64 kbps
4) Nero 1.3.3.0 -q0.23 (~64 kbps)

[Shifting] Bitrates
This bitrate table based on 10 full albums (12 CDs)
  • Last Edit: 14 September, 2009, 12:39:21 AM by IgorC

  • sauvage78
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #1
Personnaly I would have liked to see Nero LC-AAC 80Kbps just for my own curiosity.
I am convinced that nero lc beats Aotuv b5.7 on the whole bitrates range, but I would have liked to see how it deals with Itunes which is a codec I never use & also see the opinion of someone else on nero lc vs. aotuv (afterall maybe you would prefer aotuv which would be a surprise to me).
Low bitrate is not my personnal area of interest, but it was nice to read anyway.
It seems to give some favor to Itunes LC AAC but without Nero LC AAC, I fell it's incomplete IMHO.
  • Last Edit: 14 September, 2009, 01:39:35 AM by sauvage78
Rip & Check: EAC Secure [Low/C2]+CUETools [AR Confidence 2+]
Desktop: Flac -4 (for Speed) | CDImage+CUE with F2K
DAP (Android): Opus 128Kbps | Tracks with AIMP
Video: Opus 128Kbps (2.1) | VP10 (2160p60) Asap !!! | Matroska

  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #2
Mathematicians think that 2+2=4. Physicists are diasgree with them.
And engineers think that mathematicians and physicists are idiots (all of them).
  • Last Edit: 14 September, 2009, 04:11:27 AM by IgorC

  • C.R.Helmrich
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #3
Thanks for your work, IgorC! It's interesting to see that on average, you prefer AAC LC over HE-AAC even at 80kbps.

Chris
If I don't reply to your reply, it means I agree with you.

  • muaddib
  • [*][*][*][*]
  • Developer
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #4
Was there any problem with Nero that occurred often? Or was it many different problems among samples?

  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #5
There were two kinds of artifacts on Nero HE-AAC. One is constant almost for all samples and  other is variable per sample.

1. The constant artifact was present on many samples. It's like Nero resamples to low frequency  more than Apple's. It's very similar to 22khz resampling.

2. The other was exaggerated stereo loss that is most pronounceable on "Since Always" sample. Itunes doesn't present this problem.
http://ff123.net/samples/SinceAlways.flac

This sample  is aslo easy to ABX at -q0.5 (Nero 1.3.3.0):
Code: [Select]
foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v0.9.6.9
2009/09/14 16:25:29

File A: C:\MULTI\15 Since Always Stereo Loss\SinceAlways.wav
File B: C:\MULTI\15 Since Always Stereo Loss\SinceAlways.mp4

16:25:29 : Test started.
16:25:40 : 01/01  50.0%
16:25:44 : 02/02  25.0%
16:25:47 : 03/03  12.5%
16:25:51 : 04/04  6.3%
16:25:55 : 05/05  3.1%
16:25:57 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 5/5 (3.1%)

  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #6
Personnaly I would have liked to see Nero LC-AAC 80Kbps just for my own curiosity.
I am convinced that nero lc beats Aotuv b5.7 on the whole bitrates range, but I would have liked to see how it deals with Itunes which is a codec I never use & also see the opinion of someone else on nero lc vs. aotuv (afterall maybe you would prefer aotuv which would be a surprise to me).
Low bitrate is not my personnal area of interest, but it was nice to read anyway.
It seems to give some favor to Itunes LC AAC but without Nero LC AAC, I fell it's incomplete IMHO.

The test is done. I didn't test Nero at 80 kbps mostly because new encoder should come soon.
I will perform test at bitrate >128 kbps (maybe around 160-180 kbps). It will be more difficult test and I will spend more time and put more care on it. I'm looking for encoder to be transparent on my collection.

Talking about Vorbis. I get opposite results to yours (even on sample from your test). I found a lot of samples where Nero -q0.5 doesn't performs enough well while Vorbis is transparent or near transparent.  Samples like Fatboy, Emese, Since always and other.

Thanks for your work, IgorC! It's interesting to see that on average, you prefer AAC LC over HE-AAC even at 80kbps.

I felt if I did something wrong when I saw that final score for LC is better. But I found similar test performed by Guruboolez. He also prefered LC. That's good symptom. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....c=35438&hl=
  • Last Edit: 14 September, 2009, 11:12:40 PM by IgorC

  • Zarggg
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #7
Isn't comparing ~64kbps AAC to ~130kbps MP3 a bit like comparing V0 MP3 to lossless? I thought a better rule of thumb was ~100 AAC = ~130 MP3.

  • sauvage78
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #8
Zarggg:
... mp3 is the high anchor, it is a reference not a competitor.
Rip & Check: EAC Secure [Low/C2]+CUETools [AR Confidence 2+]
Desktop: Flac -4 (for Speed) | CDImage+CUE with F2K
DAP (Android): Opus 128Kbps | Tracks with AIMP
Video: Opus 128Kbps (2.1) | VP10 (2160p60) Asap !!! | Matroska

  • antman
  • [*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #9
Great work.  I enjoy reading your tests.

What I'd like to see is Coding Technologies' (Winamp) HE-AAC encoder thrown in there.  It always gets left out of the AAC discussion.

  • /mnt
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #10
Awesome test!

Seems like LAME sill struggles greatly with the harpicods on Slayer's Spill The Blood. Or is it a different track with the same name?
  • Last Edit: 15 September, 2009, 08:25:02 PM by /mnt
"I never thought I'd see this much candy in one mission!"

  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #11
The samples of test with ABC/HR logs can be downloaded from here www.mediafire.com/?mmztlvzr4mi

Awesome test!

Seems like LAME sill struggles greatly with the harpicods on Slayer's Spill The Blood. Or is it a different track with the same name?

It's the same sample.

  • IgorC
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #12
Great work.  I enjoy reading your tests.

What I'd like to see is Coding Technologies' (Winamp) HE-AAC encoder thrown in there.  It always gets left out of the AAC discussion.

You're right. CT encoder was always the last  AAC encoder to test. 6 codecs were tested and I performed only ABC/HR test ( didnt't full ABX test). I wouldn't stand for one more codec. Set of 6 codecs required a lot of time . There was no need in ABX test at these low bitrates. The artifacts are very audible and different per each codec to judge quality fairly.

I prefered to concetrate on difference of artifacts between different codecs instead of useless ABX lossless vs lossy. The concentration is lost when you waste a lof of time on ABX lossless vs lossy before you will start to compare differences between codecs.

However I will perform ABX (for lossless vs lossy. Also codec A vs codec B in doubtful cases)  for high bitrate test and will spend much more time on it.
  • Last Edit: 16 September, 2009, 01:09:30 PM by IgorC

  • Zarggg
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
AAC (Apple, Nero), Vorbis and MP3 (rock, metal)
Reply #13
... mp3 is the high anchor, it is a reference not a competitor.

Oh duh, I missed that. Carry on.

Edit: Ah, I think seeing it listed in the Comparisons section threw me off.
  • Last Edit: 17 September, 2009, 10:40:07 AM by Zarggg