Is AAC 96 from Itunes good enough so that I can squeeze lots of songs on to the player without worrying about sound quality?
oh i know that. but you still have relatively few options looking for an AAC player compared to mp3.
that's the key issue for me. i think i'm the only person i know who doesn't have an ipod but i'm still important, damn it.
iPods aren't the only portables with AAC-support.
All 3G phones can play AAC and HE AAC so there are quite many AAC players.
3G? and that is relevant because??
My friend has a very tiny Apple player, only 2 gig.
Quote from: jukkap on 18 December, 2011, 09:18:41 AMAll 3G phones can play AAC and HE AAC so there are quite many AAC players.3G? and that is relevant because?? assuming you mean smartphones in general, i have no interest in those.
I've personally moved from MP3 to AAC because of audio quality.
Oh, and 3G here is the wireless technology
So for me if MP3 is actually keeping up fairly well with modern codecs and is universally playable anywhere, what is the incentive to move on to something else? To me it's the continued effort of the LAME developers that have made this possible and made my life simpler. My hats off to them and please do keep working on it.
I would only consider moving away from mp3 if there was a codec that would cut the filesizes significantly (50% or so) at the same quality... anything esle is not worth the effort of converting 1 TB of lossless into a new format. But filesize optimization would be nice, seeing that the capacity of players has not improved at all for the last few years.
Quote from: jukkap on 19 December, 2011, 03:10:57 AMI've personally moved from MP3 to AAC because of audio quality....and what precisely did you find wrong with MP3?
AAC just gives better audio quality with half the bitrate of MP3. Very helpful when transferring my large music collection between my playback devices. From my experience 128 kbit/s Dolby Pulse AAC is about identical sound quality to 320 kbit/s LAME MP3.
Quote from: izzyfinhaifa on 18 December, 2011, 08:19:00 AMMy friend has a very tiny Apple player, only 2 gig.Does anyone else here find it amusing to hear 2 gig referred to as "very tiny"? Or was that a reference to the physical size?
I have a 4 gigabyte iPod Nano, which I consider to be pretty small, so I could go with 2 GB as "very tiny".
As per our forum rules, if you are going to make claims like this you must support them with double blind tests.
I am sorry I don't actually claim that 128 AAC is in fact better than 320 MP3 but I don't notice differences so it just works great for me.
AAC just gives better audio quality with half the bitrate of MP3.