xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Topic: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS? (Read 5694 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #25 – 2021-01-04 19:22:08

I'd argue that AAC might actually be the most used lossy codec. But MP3 certainlly has the biggest mindshare among the general population.

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #26 – 2021-01-04 21:53:51

Well, after a year of video and audio conferencing I would not be so sure.

Many VOIP and video conferencing solutions use Opus. And things like Discord, Teamspeak, the in game voice chats in games/launchers and I bet the Xbox/PSX voice chat, too. Then there are Browsers, Youtube, Whatsapp.

And if I understood correctly, the new Bluetooth LC3 codec borrowed quite a bit of Opus, too.

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #27 – 2021-01-04 23:08:07

could be as well, I'm just pretty sure MP3 is behind AAC (And I suspect Opus as well)

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #28 – 2021-01-05 14:41:57

I aggre with binaryhermit. AAC is probably the most used lossy codec atm.
Apple. Self explanatory.
All smartphones are recording videos using AAC. We are talking about billions of users.
All YouTube/Twitch streamers are using AAC.
YouTube is not using H264+AAC but it still has copy of them on the server.
I am using youtube-dl to download videos directly from YouTube and I am using H264+AAC for maximum compatibility.
All pirated movies are using H264+AAC.
Just for fun I checked a well known XXX website that is used by millions of people. Guess what, AAC again.

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #29 – 2021-01-05 15:01:16

Yes,
Add to it that during several years even most inexpensive cars come with bluetooth today so people can use Spotify/Tidal/Apple Music.
So, considering popularity of AAC as described in previous post, MP3 isn't predominant format anymore.

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #30 – 2021-01-05 17:34:38

Quote from: Markuza97 on 2021-01-05 14:41:57

...
All YouTube/Twitch streamers are using AAC.
YouTube is not using H264+AAC but it still has copy of them on the server.
I am using youtube-dl to download videos directly from YouTube and I am using H264+AAC for maximum compatibility.
...

YouTube usually has Opus too, which from a frequency spectrum perspective, provides better audio (can you hear the difference though?). And if it's just the audio that I'm after, then I'll go with it.

But yes, from a compatibility side, then aac in m4a or mp4 is the better option.

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #31 – 2021-01-05 18:35:08

"predominant format" is a matter of definition really. Are we counting files/streams in use or are we counting files/streams being encoded or what?

* Even if everyone stopped encoding to MP3, it would be a giant format - there are tons of files that will live (at least among those of use who avoid transcoding lossies). Same with AAC, but to a lesser degree.
* There are tons lots of mp2/AC3 over broadcast. They aren't just gonna disappear even if they technically could.
* According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_details_of_Netflix , Netflix delivers AAC but can also deliver Ogg Vorbis to Android devices. (Disregarding deprecated formats.)
* Sure YouTube encodes to Opus, but what devices accept what? By the way, I just checked a few old AND new videos, and it seems that YouTube now delivers Opus/AAC both at around 130, and two lower-bitrate Opus options. I wonder how present-day Opus at 130 compares with oooold AAC at 192. (Yes AAC at 192 should normally be transparent, but did YouTube's AAC encode efficiently or did it try to save CPU time?)
* What the covid-hell is Zoom using? (I'm pretty sure they haven't reinvented anything big, why should they?)

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #32 – 2021-01-05 18:48:30

Quote from: Porcus on 2021-01-05 18:35:08

* What the covid-hell is Zoom using? (I'm pretty sure they haven't reinvented anything big, why should they?)

From: https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/202920719-Meeting-and-phone-statistics

Quote

Codec: The audio being used by Zoom Phone. Usually, you'll see Opus, an audio codec that ensures high-quality audio.

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #33 – 2021-01-05 20:04:20

Quote from: Porcus on 2021-01-05 18:35:08

* Sure YouTube encodes to Opus, but what devices accept what?

https://caniuse.com/?search=opus
https://caniuse.com/?search=aac
Means that if your browser is Chrome/Firefox/Edge audio is Opus

Quote from: Porcus on 2021-01-05 18:35:08

I wonder how present-day Opus at 130 compares with oooold AAC at 192.

Ohm, that's a pitty we don't have any test with Opus and AAC . But wait... we actually have, have we?

Anyway for 99.999...% Opus 130-160 is tranparent. Because 96 kbps was already very hard https://listening-test.coresv.net/results.htm

oh and another one https://hydrogenaud.io/index.php?topic=120166.0

As you can see there is no point to even argue about quality for 128+ kbps area.... Ah yes, I know that some of us hear can do high bitrate but in reality it's transparent for big mass.

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #34 – 2021-01-05 21:52:02

Doesn't youtube use FAAC which is apparently really horrible?

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #35 – 2021-01-05 23:47:31

Quote from: binaryhermit on 2021-01-05 21:52:02

Doesn't youtube use FAAC which is apparently really horrible?

FhG, CBR, 128 kbit/s.

I uploaded 30 second clip (with lossless audio) on YouTube so I can compare it.
First picture is from YouTube.
Second picture is fhgaacenc.exe.
Pretty close.

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #36 – Today at 02:55

Quote from: Markuza97 on 2021-01-05 23:47:31

I uploaded 30 second clip (with lossless audio) on YouTube so I can compare it.
First picture is from YouTube.
Second picture is fhgaacenc.exe.
Pretty close.

I like your signature.

Re: xHE-AAC : The Death of OPUS?

Reply #37 – Today at 07:25

Quote from: IgorC on 2021-01-05 20:04:20

Quote from: Porcus on 2021-01-05 18:35:08
I wonder how present-day Opus at 130 compares with oooold AAC at 192.
Ohm, that's a pitty we don't have any test with Opus and AAC . But wait... we actually have, have we?

There was a word there.
And a context.
YouTube deprecated its 192 kbps AAC format. Was that a reasonable decision from the encoding has improved, we can reduce bitrate argument, or would that just be that they saw 192 as useless-in-the-first-place even without improving the AAC@128 / Opus@130 alternatives?
(That said, YouTube is big enough to negotiate license deals, so they might have had a "per encoded minute" and then for that reason dropped all AAC formats but one. At least it seems that there is just one non-Opus stream available for fresh uploads.)

Notice