NeroAacEnc: Linux and Windows versions, what's the difference |
  |
NeroAacEnc: Linux and Windows versions, what's the difference |
 Jul 3 2012, 09:26
Post
#26
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 1058 Joined: 4-May 04 From: France Member No.: 13875  |
QUOTE (_faber_ @ Jul 3 2012, 07:46)  I need something that works in Linux. Native one, without help of Wine. I used neroAacEnc under linux to convert my FLACs to AAC for a while. I listened to them on my iPod. I didn't run into any problems. -------------------- Save my friend from going homeless: http://outpost.fr/url/308w
|
 |
 
|
|
Jul 3 2012, 09:48
Post
#27
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 2-July 12 Member No.: 101134 |
QUOTE (skamp @ Jul 3 2012, 11:26) I used neroAacEnc under linux to convert my FLACs to AAC for a while. I listened to them on my iPod. I didn't run into any problems. Glad to hear that. I've already put up with this differences. But if anybody can prove that such differences are not due to the bug, please tell it.  It will totally appease me.
This post has been edited by _faber_: Jul 3 2012, 09:48 |
|
|
|
|
Jul 3 2012, 11:29
Post
#28
|
|
|
Group: Super Moderator Posts: 4330 Joined: 23-June 06 Member No.: 32180 |
Did I miss some other conversation where someone confirmed that there is “the bug”, whatever that is? Or are you asking, with confusing wording, if there is a bug?
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 3 2012, 11:59
Post
#29
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 2-July 12 Member No.: 101134 |
QUOTE (db1989 @ Jul 3 2012, 13:29) Did I miss some other conversation where someone confirmed that there is “the bug”, whatever that is? Or are you asking, with confusing wording, if there is a bug? Yep, exactly. I just want to know if there is a bug. Sorry for my English. This post has been edited by _faber_: Jul 3 2012, 12:00 |
|
|
|
|
Jul 3 2012, 13:02
Post
#30
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 169 Joined: 14-November 09 Member No.: 74931 |
As db1989 already pointed out it's perfectly normal to get slightly different outputs from binaries built using different compilers. It's also normal to get slightly different output from the same binary according to the system architecture in use.
Demonstration: I have three GNU/Linux PCs to hand. One runs 32-bit Debian on AMD Athlon64 hardware, another runs 32-bit Ubuntu on Core Duo (old 32-bit hardware), and another runs 64-bit Debian on Core 2 Duo. Using the identical neroAacEnc Linux 1.5.4.0 binary on each I encoded the same wav with default settings. Each encoding produced a file with a different md5sum, and the AMD based machine produced a file whose bitrate is 1 kb/s different than the two Intel machines. This is not a bug, it's predictable and normal behaviour. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 3 2012, 13:55
Post
#31
|
|
 Server Admin Group: Admin Posts: 4808 Joined: 24-September 01 Member No.: 13 |
NeroAacEnc uses loads of floating points maths and small roundoff differences can cause slightly different results. The difference between Intel and AMD machines is because it uses the Intel IPP library for some signal processing, and that uses differently optimized versions depending on the hardware it runs on.
It's also possible there is a bug in the encoder where it is at some point relying on undefined behavior. Nobody (not even with the source) can "prove" there are *no* bugs in the encoder. That's unfeasible for any-nontrivial program, and only some theoretical mathematicians have ever attempted it. Basically, the behavior you see is normal and excepted, and doesn't necessarily warrant further speculation. |
|
|
|
|
Jul 3 2012, 13:59
Post
#32
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 9 Joined: 2-July 12 Member No.: 101134 |
Takla,
Garf, I got it. Thank you, everyone, for your answers. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 18th May 2013 - 11:54 |
