Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: best converter for xhe aac encoder (Read 13477 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

best converter for xhe aac encoder

hello what is the best way to convert music to xhe aac at 320kbps

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #1 –
Why 320 kbit/s?
Even the "normal" AAC-LC is transparent at 192 kbit/s for music.
You are just wasting storage, processing power (battery) and compatibility for no real reason.
xHE-AAC is mostly used at very low bitrates.
gold plated toslink fan

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #2 –
the question remains, which encoder is the best?  i am currently using foobar

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #3 –
Quote from: MinPower on
the question remains, which encoder is the best?  i am currently using foobar

There are two different encoders: Exhale and Fraunhofer (Fhg) xHE-AAC.
I doubt you'll find any serious test comparing Exhale and Fhg xHE-AAC at such high bitrate. At 320 kbps all modern perceptual format are eaqually transparent. Period. Someone might find a pathological sample barely ABXable with one codec at this bitrate, but it wouldn't mean this codec is worse than any other or less secure. I guess few people are using FhG xHE-AAC at 320 kbps and therefore you won't see any report on critical samples: unpopular codecs/settings are always free of known issues.

If you're looking for frontends, GUI, tools for easily convert any audio format to xHE-AAC, you may keep foobar2000 or try Poikosoft EZCD Converter:
https://www.poikosoft.com/
This one is not free but is in my knowledge the only one to support both Exhale and FhG XHE-AAC. It's also more friendly.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #4 –
I also forgot that Exhale encoder (working with foobar2000) doesn't support 320 kbps for stereo material. Fraunhofer's xHE-AAC encoder in EZ-CD Audio Converter has a CBR 320 kbps and a also VBR at near 256 kbps. But I agree with Markuza97: 320 kbps is just a waste of space because it doesn't sound any better than ~192 kbps and only marginally better than ~128 kbps.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #5 –
Its that 320 has sort of become a 'defacto' standard. Not because its
needed over 192.  Like the loudness war, the smaller is perceived as weaker.
I 've seen radio radio stations accepting WAV and 320k files as only choice.
This really has its roots in MP3 habits and the decreasing price of storage,
although now theres a shift back with limited ssd and omitting sdcard slots.

I can think of other things like re encoding headroom or if you dont trust the
encoder yet at lower settings or its VBR..

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #6 –
I just managed to use the xhe-aac encoder with foobar, just to realize i cant play it anywhere when i dont have the fdk-aac decoder.
Btw i dont think you can encode xhe-aac at 320. At least not the github edition.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #7 –
Quote from: shadowking on
I can think of other things like re encoding headroom or if you dont trust the
encoder yet at lower settings or its VBR..
Thing is, you cant even trust em at high bitrates. There is no quality guarantee with lossy.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #8 –
I advise against archiving in xhe-aac if thats the plan. I can encode samples where even on the highest bitrate (108 kbps) even a baby could blindly differentiate between the flac.

Edit: i just noticed that isnt the highest. how can i get the CVBR with the command line tool?

anyway, i get better results on that bitrate on other codecs.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #9 –
Quote from: Kartoffelbrei on
i dont think you can encode xhe-aac at 320. At least not the github edition.
That's precisely what guruboolez wrote above (I assume that, by "Github edition", you mean the exhale encoder on Gitlab).
Quote from: Kartoffelbrei on
I advise against archiving in xhe-aac if thats the plan. I can encode samples where even on the highest bitrate (108 kbps) even a baby could blindly differentiate between the flac.
Which executable are you using? The highest preset (non-SBR preset 9) should give you ~192 kbps on average.

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

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #10 –
The Mr. Helmrich himself :O ^^
I have version 1.1.9 and you are right. I assumed the option 0-9 were a different codec.
My bad.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #11 –
i am very disappointed at the results, 128kbs music is still over 3 MB, i would expect 2022 technology can make it less than 2 MB.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #12 –
Quote from: guruboolez on
Quote from: MinPower on
the question remains, which encoder is the best?  i am currently using foobar

There are two different encoders: Exhale and Fraunhofer (Fhg) xHE-AAC.
I doubt you'll find any serious test comparing Exhale and Fhg xHE-AAC at such high bitrate. At 320 kbps all modern perceptual format are eaqually transparent. Period. Someone might find a pathological sample barely ABXable with one codec at this bitrate, but it wouldn't mean this codec is worse than any other or less secure. I guess few people are using FhG xHE-AAC at 320 kbps and therefore you won't see any report on critical samples: unpopular codecs/settings are always free of known issues.

If you're looking for frontends, GUI, tools for easily convert any audio format to xHE-AAC, you may keep foobar2000 or try Poikosoft EZCD Converter:
https://www.poikosoft.com/
This one is not free but is in my knowledge the only one to support both Exhale and FhG XHE-AAC. It's also more friendly.

My bad, i should be more specific.  I don't want to encode aac to 320kbs.  In fact, i am trying to make my music size as little as possible, while preserving more quality.  Somewhere around 96-128 seems reasonable.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #13 –
Since the thread title is asking about xHE-AAC encoders: there were two listening tests at ~96 kbps stereo here in the recent past, one by guruboolez here and one by Kamedo2 here.

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

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #14 –
Quote from: MinPower on
My bad, i should be more specific.  I don't want to encode aac to 320kbs.  In fact, i am trying to make my music size as little as possible, while preserving more quality.  Somewhere around 96-128 seems reasonable.
I hope you are doing that to a SECONDARY library are you?

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #15 –
Quote from: shadowking on
Its that 320 has sort of become a 'defacto' standard.

It is customary but not a good idea for practical reasons.

I think few of us want to get rid of the original files because when you use AAC or other formats at 320kbps you can keep them in lossless, the cost for the additional space will change so little that it is irrelevant. This is the main reason I don't use xHE-AAC encoders to store my music.

Those who keep music in xHE-AAC on this forum have practically written that they do not have a great interest in preserving its quality. I use a lot xHE-AAC to publish the speech of webinar and conferences from 8 and more hours of recording, also in this case not at high bitrates because if I reach 192kbps I first use other faster encodings and I get the same bitrate, for example with IMA-ADPCM for monophonic voices you won't need more space.

In my opinion the greatest advantage of xHE-AAC is to offer a higher quality than HE-AAC in the bandwidth of a conversation made on the mobile phone (less than 24kbps but only for mono content without music, or 36kbps with Exhale, HE-AAC, any AAC-LC@24kHz or Opus for similar quality). For this in fact it has no rivals (because now it is reproduced almost everywhere without the user having to worry about it). Another case is when you have to play the songs on your mobile, otherwise the space to keep them in my opinion today costs less than the effort of converting them.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #16 –
Quote from: Kartoffelbrei on
Quote from: MinPower on
My bad, i should be more specific.  I don't want to encode aac to 320kbs.  In fact, i am trying to make my music size as little as possible, while preserving more quality.  Somewhere around 96-128 seems reasonable.
I hope you are doing that to a SECONDARY library are you?
Yes,  that is my secondary library.  I am buying a phone with no sd card slot to travel,  i want to conserve as much space as possible for other things.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #17 –
Did it work?

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #19 –
Quote from: MinPower on
Quote from: Kartoffelbrei on
Did it work?

No, i still hasn't able to find the best encoder for Xhe-aac

Unless you wish to license the Fraunhofer encoder (Fhg), I'd say C.R.Helmrich's Exhale is your best bet.

Here are the foobar2000 converter settings for using exhale at quality level 9 (~192 kbps) as well as quality level 4 (~112 kbps).  Give those a listen and see what you think. :)

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #20 –
Quote from: jarsonic on
Unless you wish to license the Fraunhofer encoder (Fhg), I'd say C.R.Helmrich's Exhale is your best bet.

It depends on the bitrate, the more it increases and the fewer benefits it will have in leaving Exhale for the Fraunhofer encoder (Fhg).The maximum yield is that with only the voice at the lowest bitrates.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #21 –
Quote from: celona on
Quote from: jarsonic on
Unless you wish to license the Fraunhofer encoder (Fhg), I'd say C.R.Helmrich's Exhale is your best bet.

It depends on the bitrate, the more it increases and the fewer benefits it will have in leaving Exhale for the Fraunhofer encoder (Fhg).The maximum yield is that with only the voice at the lowest bitrates.

Yes, you're right.  I was basing my response on this:

Quote from: MinPower on
I don't want to encode aac to 320kbs.  In fact, i am trying to make my music size as little as possible, while preserving more quality.  Somewhere around 96-128 seems reasonable.

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #22 –
Quote from: MinPower on
i am very disappointed at the results, 128kbs music is still over 3 MB, i would expect 2022 technology can make it less than 2 MB.
What.

Quote from: MinPower on
I am buying a phone with no sd card slot to travel,  i want to conserve as much space as possible for other things.
Why not using Opus then? What's the point of choosing USAC over Opus?
Opus VBR 256 + SoX

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #23 –
Quote from: Eurobeat_fan on
Quote from: MinPower on
i am very disappointed at the results, 128kbs music is still over 3 MB, i would expect 2022 technology can make it less than 2 MB.
What.

Quote from: MinPower on
I am buying a phone with no sd card slot to travel,  i want to conserve as much space as possible for other things.
Why not using Opus then? What's the point of choosing USAC over Opus?
I am trying to figure out which is better as well, opus or xhe-aac.  I read from this forum saying that xhe aac is better than opus in low bitrate

Re: best converter for xhe aac encoder

Reply #24 –
Quote from: MinPower on
I am trying to figure out which is better as well, opus or xhe-aac.  I read from this forum saying that xhe aac is better than opus in low bitrate
Opus has better compatibility with smartphone players and it's almost 3x times faster in terms of decoding so you get better battery life. I guess that's what matters at this bitrate because both codecs are not consistently better than the other in terms of sound quality.
Opus VBR 256 + SoX