Skip to main content
Topic: QAAC: discussion, questions, feature requests, etc. (Read 463555 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: QAAC: discussion, questions, feature requests, etc.

Reply #1125
can someone explain why qaac.exe and qaac64.exe does not make identical m4a file, from same source file, with same settings, -v 320 ? 🙄

Re: QAAC: discussion, questions, feature requests, etc.

Reply #1126
Slightly different order of operations -> slightly different result.

with floating point values, a*c + b*c isn't always equal to (a + b)*c, and even (a+b)+c isn't always equal to a+(b+c)

Re: QAAC: discussion, questions, feature requests, etc.

Reply #1127
Slightly different order of operations -> slightly different result.

with floating point values, a*c + b*c isn't always equal to (a + b)*c, and even (a+b)+c isn't always equal to a+(b+c)

that makes sense. thanks!

Re: QAAC: discussion, questions, feature requests, etc.

Reply #1128
... and (as far as I know) m4a files also contain metadata called "recording date" which is a time stamp down to a second.

Re: QAAC: discussion, questions, feature requests, etc.

Reply #1129
There is a warning on the changelog for qaac 2.69:

Quote
Note that opus support in libsndfile was committed VERY recently and it's not yet released officially.
Newest official release of libsndfile is version 1.0.28, which is some 3 years old and doesn't contain
opus support. So if you want libsndfile with opus support, you have to grab sources from github and
build it yourself.

I see that libsndfile 1.0.29 has in fact been released only 3 days ago and on my testing so far has meant that qaac has successfully used opus files as input. I have not tested extensively however and I would be interested to hear if others have tested with the new libsndfile?

Re: QAAC: discussion, questions, feature requests, etc.

Reply #1130
Hi
i have upgrade qaac to 2.69

but does apple upgrade recently the aac codec included in itunes ?
seeing in the qaac changelog there is nothing related to aac encoder
thanks

Re: QAAC: discussion, questions, feature requests, etc.

Reply #1131
I don't think so, I've recently checked if the killer sample "Fighter_Beat_Loop" still manages to defeat it, and unfortunately it still does.
If there were any improvements, I'd think they need to fix the obvious weaknesses first...
some ANC'd headphones + AutoEq-based impulse + Meier Crossfeed (30%)

Re: QAAC: discussion, questions, feature requests, etc.

Reply #1132
I don't think so, I've recently checked if the killer sample "Fighter_Beat_Loop" still manages to defeat it, and unfortunately it still does.
If there were any improvements, I'd think they need to fix the obvious weaknesses first...

Synth's common in Ambient/industrial music have issues too. Not impressed some track's need 224 ~ 256kbps to sound fine, While Vorbis/Lame sounded the same at 130kbps.
Got locked out on a password i didn't remember. :/

 

Re: QAAC: discussion, questions, feature requests, etc.

Reply #1133
I noticed QAAC or apple application support is faster on my (admittedly unpatched) W7 SP1 installation than my W10 installation on the same PC. W7 is about ~330x and produces slightly smaller files, differences in KBs or 0-1kbps in bitrate, while W10 is at ~260x. LAME and OPUS run at the roughly the same speed on W7 and W10 (both ~330x) and produce the exact same files. This has me wondering.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2020