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: High bitrate formats experimental testing. (Read 41507 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

SoundExpert testing engine is now fully operational and I am going to add hi-bitrate codecs. As the testing is “participation consuming” and the same time it has to be interesting in the results sense I suppose to add:

1.   SBC (A2DP, Bluetooth) 375 kbit/s (joint stereo)
2.   ATRAC3plus 256 kbit/s or ATRAC4.5 292 kbit/s
3.   MP3 256 kbit/s  or WMA  256 kbit/s or AAC 256 kbit/s

Also I am not sure about the particular codecs for the third point. Any suggestions and opinions would be helpful.
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #1 –
Quote
Also I am not sure about the particular codecs for the third point. Any suggestions and opinions would be helpful.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326593"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I would be interested in AAC. The question is, which aac-lc encoder? QuickTime 7.02 have a 'vbr' lc-aac encoder. I think you should consider that one.

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #2 –
Quote
I would be interested in AAC. The question is, which aac-lc encoder? QuickTime 7.02 have a 'vbr' lc-aac encoder. I think you should consider that one.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326594"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You mean aac-lc 256 from iTunes 5.0?
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #3 –
Quote
2.   ATRAC3plus 256 kbit/s or ATRAC4.5 292 kbit/s
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326593"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Use Atrac3plus because there is no software encoder for standard Atrac and thus no possibility to use it with any Sony hardware except Minidisc players.

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #4 –
Quote
You mean aac-lc 256 from iTunes 5.0?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326596"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yeah. They are exactly the same encoder.

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #5 –
Quote
I would be interested in AAC....[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=326594"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It seems to me that mp3_256 would be preferable because most people know its quality level and so it could be a kind of an ancor for all other codecs. Even it might be added to the system first for the purpose. Then other ones could be added and AAC as well. What mp3 codec to choose is still a question.
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #6 –
I would like to see Ogg Vorbis in testings but not the 1.0 version (as I see on the official site)  .
aoTuV b4 should be the right one.
Ogg Vorbis for music and speech [q-2.0 - q6.0]
FLAC for recordings to be edited
Speex for speech

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #7 –
Yes, de Mon, I am too. Finally all major codecs will be presented. But now I have to choose just a few one. The old codecs (like Ogg 1.0 or QDesign music 2) still be in system for comparison .... and memories. 
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #8 –
I added first high bit-rate codec to SoundExpert:

mp3 CBR@256.1 (Audition 1.5) - MPEG-1 Layer 3 CBR, 256.1 kbit/s FBR
CODER: MP3/mp3PRO® Encoder for Adobe Audition 1.5
- Codec: Current - Best Quality
- Allow Mid-Side Joint Stereo: No
- Allow Intensity Joint Stereo: No
- Allow Narrowing of Stereo Image: No
- 44100 Hz Joint Stereo
DECODER: MAD 0.15.2b

It will play the role of "anchor" as it is stable and well known. All its test files were graded once by myself and the rating displayed is a kind of starting point. In other words the rating value be defined more precicely as volonteers will add their grades.

As I understood from the above posts the next candidates for inclusion are:

1. AAC 256 (CBR or VBR ?)
2. OggVorbis ~256
3. ATRAC3plus 256

and my personal desire - SBC (A2DP, Bluetooth) 375.

Any other proposals?
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #9 –
Quote
mp3 CBR@256.1 (Audition 1.5) - MPEG-1 Layer 3 CBR, 256.1 kbit/s FBR
CODER: MP3/mp3PRO® Encoder for Adobe Audition 1.5
<...>
It will play the role of "anchor" as it is stable and well known.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337523"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


 

Honestly dude, you won't be taken even slightly seriously here if you don't use LAME - and at VBR!

Edit: BTW, SBC is known to be really godawful, maybe even worse than MP1 (yes, I mean it! MPEG audio layer one). So, if you really go with it, you might as well make it the low anchor.

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #10 –
Quote
- Allow Mid-Side Joint Stereo: No
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337523"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #11 –
Quote
Honestly dude, you won't be taken even slightly seriously here if you don't use LAME - and at VBR!


Why not to include LAME. Don't see obstacles (and I'm not afraid to be taken here not seriously  )


Quote
Edit: BTW, SBC is known to be really godawful, maybe even worse than MP1 (yes, I mean it! MPEG audio layer one). So, if you really go with it, you might as well make it the low anchor.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337525"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Good chance to prove this.
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #12 –
Quote
Quote
- Allow Mid-Side Joint Stereo: No[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337523"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337526"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Well, I suppose he does have somewhat of a point there. Some FhG encoders mess up joint stereo, so when you go with high bitrates, it's better to use the headroom and use standard stereo instead.

Dunno if the FhG implementation in Audition has that issue though - specially because there are three of them!

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #13 –
Quote
Quote
Edit: BTW, SBC is known to be really godawful, maybe even worse than MP1 (yes, I mean it! MPEG audio layer one). So, if you really go with it, you might as well make it the low anchor.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Good chance to prove this.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337529"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Well, you can read the specifications to get an idea.

Here they are:
[a href="https://www.bluetooth.org/foundry/adopters/document/A2DP_Spec_V1_0/en/]https://www.bluetooth.org/foundry/adopters/...P_Spec_V1_0/en/[/url]

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #14 –
Quote
Here they are:
https://www.bluetooth.org/foundry/adopters/...P_Spec_V1_0/en/
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337531"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, I've got it. I also have Bluetooth headphones and software implementation of the codec. It sounds not bad. It seems to me that the comparison would be interesting.
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #15 –
Quote
I added first high bit-rate codec to SoundExpert:

mp3 CBR@256.1 (Audition 1.5) - MPEG-1 Layer 3 CBR, 256.1 kbit/s FBR
CODER: MP3/mp3PRO® Encoder for Adobe Audition 1.5
- Codec: Current - Best Quality
- Allow Mid-Side Joint Stereo: No
- Allow Intensity Joint Stereo: No
- Allow Narrowing of Stereo Image: No
- 44100 Hz Joint Stereo
DECODER: MAD 0.15.2b


[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337523"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Is it just me or did you specify turning on joint stereo once, and then turning it off twice ?  Also, can I ask why you want to use such an outdated encoder (ignoreing the questionable settings)?

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #16 –
Quote
mp3 CBR@256.1 (Audition 1.5) - MPEG-1 Layer 3 CBR, 256.1 kbit/s FBR
CODER: MP3/mp3PRO® Encoder for Adobe Audition 1.5


ummh, why not use the one bundled with windows media player 10? (It's also FhG, and dated 2004)

Quote
- Allow Mid-Side Joint Stereo: No

you can set everything to yes and yet it still use stereo
If I'm not wrong, WMP10 (FhG ACM) will encode everything in stereo from 160kbps and above.

I think you should also include LAME --preset extreme, many use that, especially this forum

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #17 –
The coder used:


These are recomended settings for 256 CBR. To be true I'm not shure the output is "joint stereo" because only MAD decoder stated this while decoding.

The reasons why:

1. Audition is claimed (by itself though) to be PRO.
2. Its mp3/mp3PRO filter has many settings for both CBR/VBR and mp3/PRO (apart from eg. WMP 10)
3. It became "classic" already (as MM JukeBox also uses it) and hardly be tuned further in the future. "Anchor" indeed.

LAME --preset extreme. Are there any other setting proposals for the coder?
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #18 –
Quote
1. Audition is claimed (by itself though) to be PRO.


Hrm... maybe I should add "LAME Pro" to the new LAME homepage design. It won't make the slightest difference other than a warm fuzzy feeling in the users, but oh well...

Quote
2. Its mp3/mp3PRO filter has many settings for both CBR/VBR and mp3/PRO (apart from eg. WMP 10)


LAME has many more settings for CBR/VBR.

Quote
LAME --preset extreme. Are there any other setting proposals for the coder?[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337682"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Tweaking is bad... mmmmmkay?

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #19 –
Quote
1. Audition is claimed (by itself though) to be PRO.

I tested this summer the "professional" version of Fraunhofer at 96 kbps. At this bitrate, it was well-known (understand: by tests older than Mathusalem) that LAME is uncompetitive against Fraunhofer encoders, especially the "Pro" ones.

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....pe=post&id=1654

more details: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....ndpost&p=314613

I wouldn't use Fraunhofer engine for a blind test competition.

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #20 –
 Ok. Let's say Fgh mp3 coder will be the "low anchor" in 256 coders group at SoundExpert. Realy better?  No problem. And its popularity is a sort of popularity of Latin among doctors.

Quote
Tweaking is bad... mmmmmkay?
Sorry?
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #21 –
Quote
Ok. Let's say Fgh mp3 coder will be the "low anchor" in 256 coders group at SoundExpert.

I seriously doubt that any 256 kbps encoding could play the "low anchor" role. But if you insist, why not Blade instead?
But if your purpose is to directely compare MP3 to other (real) challengers, I strongly believe that LAME would be much more interesting to test than any Fraunhofer encoder.

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #22 –
Quote
But if your purpose is to directely compare MP3 to other (real) challengers, I strongly believe that LAME would be much more interesting to test than any Fraunhofer encoder.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=337697"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

LAME will be added for sure. I suppose: 3.97beta -V 0 --vbr-new ? (for 256 group).
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #23 –
It looks as the most consensual setting (I suppose) for this bitrate range. I'm not sure that it corresponds to 256 kbps encodings on average, but it's probably not far from this target.

High bitrate formats experimental testing.

Reply #24 –
For a chain of 9 SoundExpert test files 3.97beta -V 0 --vbr-new showed 217.3 kbps. I think it's ok for 256 group.

Should I add Lame first, choosing from:

1. AAC
2. ATRAC3plus
3. Lame
4. Ogg
keeping audio clear together - soundexpert.org