Hydrogenaudio Forums

Lossy Audio Compression => AAC => AAC - General => Topic started by: Hall on 2006-11-04 09:20:03

Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Hall on 2006-11-04 09:20:03
Yea, probably this clears up the confusion.

AAC / LC-AAC = AAC
AACplus / AAC+ / AACPlus v1 / HE-AAC = AAC + SBR
AACPlus / eAAC+ / AACPlus v2 / HE-AAC v2 = AAC + SBR + PS

AAC = Advanced Audio Coding
SBR = Spectral Band Replication
PS = Parametric Stereo
HE = High Effiency

Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Firon on 2006-11-04 18:08:58
aacPlus is a marketing term, while HE-AAC (or LC-AAC + SBR) is the correct term.
LC-AAC is AAC, but not all AAC is LC, or even HE. There's SSR, LD, Main profile AAC (which can have PNS), and even AAC SLS and ALS.
SSR = Scalable Sample rate
LD = Low Delay
PNS = Perceptual Noise Substitution
SLS = Scalable to Lossless
ALS = Audio Lossless Coding
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: pepoluan on 2006-11-07 05:05:12
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Garf on 2006-11-07 06:34:09
I don't think it's "AAC SLS" and "AAC ALS", just ALS and SLS. Notably ALS has nothing whatsoever in common with AAC. You are just confusing yourself there  Oh, but there is also AAC LTP. And maybe BSAC.

Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Gambit on 2006-11-07 08:15:26
What about ACC?
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: unmake on 2006-11-07 08:37:40
This calls for some Venn Diagrams.
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: odyssey on 2006-11-07 09:22:46
I'm starting to believe there are even more AAC terms than network terms
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Squeller on 2006-11-07 10:05:18
What about ACC?
Not for me, but probably for a lot of people it's ACC (http://www.husten.de/arzneimittel/hustenloeser/acc.php) season now.
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Gambit on 2006-11-07 10:51:12
What about ACC?
Not for me, but probably for a lot of people it's ACC (http://www.husten.de/arzneimittel/hustenloeser/acc.php) season now.

You know it's official when even Nero uses it.
(http://www.burrrn.net/stuff/NeroACC.png)
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Ajax on 2006-11-07 11:22:54
And don't forget the MANY different companies and organizations developing and tuning their "own version" of AAC codec.

1) Nero Digital Audio has their own version of AAC.
2) Apple has the iTunes version of AAC.
3) Coding Technologies has their own version of AAC (currently used in Winamp).
4) Dolby Labs has their own version of AAC.
5) Open Source Project has their own version of AAC called FAAC / FAAD2.
6) I think even RealNetworks has their own version of AAC encoder in RealPlayer.

I'm sure I forgot many others. Just crazy isn't it? 

I'm still waiting for LAME AAC (just kidding). 
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Enig123 on 2006-11-07 11:49:07
6) I think even RealNetworks has their own version of AAC encoder in RealPlayer.


IIRC, real's aac encoder is from Coding Tech. as winamp is, just an older version.

Quote
I'm still waiting for LAME AAC (just kidding). 


It's quite true that Gabriel showed interest in AAC developing somewhere in this forum. I'd like that happen too. 
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Garf on 2006-11-07 11:54:51
And don't forget the MANY different companies and organizations developing and tuning their "own version" of AAC codec.




AAC was designed exactly so that anyone could implement it. The same is true for MP3, Vorbis, ...
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Firon on 2006-11-10 06:22:05
And maybe BSAC.


Speaking of BSAC, what exactly is it? I've heard the term, but I've never seen any BSAC files or an encoder/decoder. I'm rather curious about it.
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: dbAmp on 2006-11-14 04:13:37
And don't forget the MANY different companies and organizations developing and tuning their "own version" of AAC codec.

1) Nero Digital Audio has their own version of AAC.
2) Apple has the iTunes version of AAC.
3) Coding Technologies has their own version of AAC (currently used in Winamp).
4) Dolby Labs has their own version of AAC.
5) Open Source Project has their own version of AAC called FAAC / FAAD2.
6) I think even RealNetworks has their own version of AAC encoder in RealPlayer.

I'm sure I forgot many others. Just crazy isn't it? 

I'm still waiting for LAME AAC (just kidding). 


I'm fairly certain that Apple licenses their AAC codec from Dolby Labs.
Title: Sick of all these AAC jargons
Post by: Firon on 2006-11-14 04:17:37
But do they tune it themselves or let Dolby do all the work?
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019