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: [Off-Topic] AAC vs OGG vs OPUS (OGG and OPUS are boosting sub-bass.) (Read 2607 times) previous topic - next topic - Topic derived from AAC vs OGG vs OPUS (O...
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

[Off-Topic] AAC vs OGG vs OPUS (OGG and OPUS are boosting sub-bass.)

I'm not an audiophile.
Opus is intended for classical/rock/melodic/pads. There isn't a solution to fix it.
It will never sound the same as Nero AAC ABR two-pass 69 kbps
or m4a 128 kbps or mp3 320 kbps.
Opus is good when you want accuracy or good sound in classical music.
I made an encoder called opusrug but I wouldn't encode at 133 kbps, 128 kbps should be used for serious music like classical and with stock 1.3.1.
Every encoder has different audio signature.
Aac is an old codec but people still like it even if they can ABX at 128 kbps.

Re: [Off-Topic] AAC vs OGG vs OPUS (OGG and OPUS are boosting sub-bass.)

Reply #1 –
Quote from: fabiorug on
Opus is intended for classical/rock/melodic/pads. There isn't a solution to fix it.

This wrong and very clueless.  Codecs also don't have "signatures". 

Re: [Off-Topic] AAC vs OGG vs OPUS (OGG and OPUS are boosting sub-bass.)

Reply #2 –
Exhale hides the violin in pop music in some builds (it has low VBR bitrate) but they make sacrifices to do that.
Is intended is wrong, I mistaken words, also I have no sound on my PC.
Anyway Nero m4a ABR 2 pass after 69 kbps don't sound good and is slower to encode.
But still I think opus is thin on Pop because it tries to preserve accuracy.
I'm not saying the quality is worse but on some tracks you can notice a difference in sound opus to m4a even if opus is much cleaner.
Sorry for grammar.

Re: [Off-Topic] AAC vs OGG vs OPUS (OGG and OPUS are boosting sub-bass.)

Reply #3 –
Fabio, the things you say are very wrong.
Without proper ABX testing to prove your claims, all of them are subjective and therefore invalid.
Error 404; signature server not available.
 

Re: [Off-Topic] AAC vs OGG vs OPUS (OGG and OPUS are boosting sub-bass.)

Reply #4 –
yes you're right. I could say opusrug encoder at 223 kbps is the best, but is not true, is subjective and it will likely waste bits. To establish quality of a professional encoder it needs proper ABX testing. I'm sorry I spread false information. I will mute.
And anyway I prefer lossless, I use FLAC.
People still use AC3 224 kbps for example in handbrake video encoder GUI
Also not only the quality is important of a modern codec.