IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

8 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 6 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Multiformat Listening Test @ 128 kbps - FINISHED
yulyo!
post Jan 15 2006, 16:11
Post #76





Group: Members
Posts: 165
Joined: 19-September 05
Member No.: 24567



Yes bond, it seems you're right.
every time some test is released, nero have some problems. "it was the old old version", "the new one has a bug", "but the one we will release will be the best. Maybe i shoud switch to Ogg crying.gif
I think i will.

This post has been edited by yulyo!: Jan 15 2006, 16:12
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bond
post Jan 15 2006, 16:13
Post #77





Group: Members
Posts: 881
Joined: 11-October 02
Member No.: 3523



QUOTE (Sebastian Mares @ Jan 15 2006, 05:09 PM)
OK, results page now contains 3 final graphs: non-zoomed with Nero, zoomed with Nero and zoomed without Nero.

thx, i really think its less confusing to not bug newbies with the nero issues, by being able to show the plot without nero smile.gif

QUOTE
BTW, could you please remove your plot, bond? I would like people to link to my graphs in case I change something. smile.gif
*


removed

This post has been edited by bond: Jan 15 2006, 16:17


--------------------
I know, that I know nothing (Socrates)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post Jan 15 2006, 16:56
Post #78





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



I too would like to thank everyone who contributed this test. I tried all 18 samples and like many others I found that I could clearly differentiate only the low anchor. I forgot to add my name to the results, but I could ABX only a few occasional samples besides the low anchor.

The result is very interesting and in my opinion it shows that the used encoding format can now be freely selected for other reasons than audio quality. MP3, Vorbis, AAC and WMA Pro are good enough for almost everyone.


In regard to the mistake with the yello sample I started a new thread here: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=40625. That thread has a small listening test with a lossless version of the same sample.

I would like to add that originally I didn't offer the sample for a listening test. I cut it only for evaluating WMA 2-pass behavior before the test. It made WMA standard 2-pass internally use high bitrates when it was combined with an almost silent piano part. For a listening test I would have selected a bit different sample from the same album. Actually, I offered to make a new sample, but the time was limited and Sebastian preferred to use this one. So it ended up in the test.

Edit: a small fix

This post has been edited by Alex B: Jan 15 2006, 18:19


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Jan 15 2006, 17:03
Post #79





Group: Members
Posts: 1506
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Argentina, Bs As
Member No.: 18803



QUOTE (yulyo! @ Jan 15 2006, 07:11 AM)
Yes bond, it seems you're right.
every time some test is released, nero have some problems. "it was the old old version", "the new one has a bug", "but the one we will release will be the best. Maybe i shoud switch to Ogg crying.gif
I think i will.
*


Maybe somebody will move to ogg. But many people wil stay with MP3/AAC.
Some guys have already said about compability. AAC and OGG are tight in this test. IMHO AAC is the best tradeoff quality/compability.

Let's see globally.
1. CT has a good HE-AAC v1 and v2 codec but not LC-AAC
2. iTunes has a best LC-AAC but not HE-AAC (not SBR neither PS)
3. Nero has 2d place LA-AAC and first available VBR HE-AAC v1 and v2 both.

It's dificult to develop 2 profiles at the same time. But Nero is in great position. wink.gif

I think it's not good idea for cinysm like "Nero sucks" . A little respect was always welcome.

This post has been edited by IgorC: Jan 15 2006, 17:05
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jan 15 2006, 17:27
Post #80





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (IgorC @ Jan 15 2006, 05:03 PM)
AAC is the best tradeoff quality/compability.
*

That's interesting smile.gif Could I get the list of compatible AAC players? When I was interested of changing my own player (I finally repaired it), I found several Vorbis players but only few AAC ones. And all of them were made by one company. There are now products like phones or game device compatible with AAC even here the list is rather small compared to Vorbis players. And price of such device is often dissuasive.

Here is the list of compatible Vorbis players:
http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/PortablePlayers
http://wiki.xiph.org/index.php/StaticPlayers

Is there any way to get the (longer) list of AAC players? I'm interested to get one. Thanks smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
moozooh
post Jan 15 2006, 17:30
Post #81





Group: Members
Posts: 356
Joined: 22-September 04
From: Moscow
Member No.: 17192



QUOTE (IgorC @ Jan 15 2006, 07:03 PM)
Maybe somebody will move to ogg. But many people wil stay with MP3/AAC.
Some guys have already said about compability.  AAC and OGG are tight in this test.  IMHO  AAC is the best tradeoff quality/compability.
*

Not sure about that one. How many different hardware players support AAC aside from iPod? How many players support HE-AAC? HE-AAC v2?

QUOTE (IgorC @ Jan 15 2006, 07:03 PM)
Let's see globally.
*

Well yeah, but none of them does all of that better than others. Nero shows an effort, but there are numerous bugs promises like the ones yulyo stated.
So it's all a matter of personal affection or something like that. At least with Vorbis, there is no hard choices: aoTuV b4.51 for the win. Everything else is inferior.

This post has been edited by Mo0zOoH: Jan 15 2006, 17:31


--------------------
Infrasonic Quartet + Sennheiser HD650 + Microlab Solo 2 mk3. 
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Jan 15 2006, 17:33
Post #82





Group: Members
Posts: 1506
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Argentina, Bs As
Member No.: 18803



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jan 15 2006, 08:27 AM)
QUOTE (IgorC @ Jan 15 2006, 05:03 PM)
AAC is the best tradeoff quality/compability.
*

That's interesting smile.gif Could I get the list of compatible AAC players?


yes, that's interesting. smile.gif I said imho. It significates for me. For HD-DVD or/and blu ray players AAC will be wisely supported. As mp3 is supported now. AAC MPEG-4 is the next standard from MPEG like mp3 (mpeg 1 layer 3) is now. http://www.blu-raydisc.com/assets/download..._0305-12955.pdf

Asbolutly all HD-DVD, Blu ray and mobile devices will support AAC.

This post has been edited by IgorC: Jan 15 2006, 17:34
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Jan 15 2006, 17:36
Post #83





Group: Members
Posts: 1506
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Argentina, Bs As
Member No.: 18803



QUOTE (Mo0zOoH @ Jan 15 2006, 08:30 AM)
How many players support HE-AAC? HE-AAC v2?


I didn't said nothing about HE-AAC device's support. Could you point me?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jan 15 2006, 17:43
Post #84





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



For HD-DVD or/and blu ray players AAC will be wisely supported.
> Will?! So AAC isn't more compatible but rather will be more compatible. I didn't see AAC as audio part of these new formats. It would be a nice thing to see this becomes true smile.gif


QUOTE
As mp3 is supported now. AAC MPEG-4 is the next standard from MPEG like mp3 (mpeg 1 layer 3) is now.

LC-AAC is the MPEG-4 standard for years, but hasn't really reached the marked (except for Apple's product). Most manufacturers are still supporting 1/ MP3 then 2/ WMA then 3/Vorbis instead of AAC. Currently at least. That's why I wonder about the claim that AAC is more compatible. So if I understand correctly, AAC is more compatible with the future whereas Vorbis or WMA standard are more compatible with the present laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
yulyo!
post Jan 15 2006, 17:46
Post #85





Group: Members
Posts: 165
Joined: 19-September 05
Member No.: 24567



IgorC: "I think it's not good idea for cinysm like "Nero sucks" . A little respect was always welcome."
Igor, i didn't said anything like this in my post. I just said that there are a lot of problems whit Nero AAC.
Short question: is iTunes encoding MP4 too, or just M4A?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jan 15 2006, 17:51
Post #86





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



I just finished to download the Blu-Ray PDF. Supported audio formats are:
- "LPCM as well as Dolby® Digital - Dolby Digital Plus, Dolby Lossless, DTS Digital Surround and DTS-HD audio formats".

Did I miss something ?

PS: CTRL + F "AAC" shows no results. huh.gif

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Jan 15 2006, 17:53
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bond
post Jan 15 2006, 17:51
Post #87





Group: Members
Posts: 881
Joined: 11-October 02
Member No.: 3523



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jan 15 2006, 06:43 PM)
For HD-DVD or/and blu ray  players AAC will be wisely supported.
> Will?! So AAC isn't more compatible but rather will be more compatible. I didn't see AAC as audio part of these new formats. It would be a nice thing to see this becomes true smile.gif

aac isnt part of the normal audio formats in hddvd, its only part of the "rom-zone" whatever this mean. i dont even know if support is mandatory and i dunno how things are handled on bluray

even if it would be mandatory it still wouldnt necessarily mean that your hddvd player can play your aac mp4 files

QUOTE (yulyo! @ Jan 15 2006, 06:46 PM)
IgorC: "I think it's not good idea for cinysm like "Nero sucks" . A little respect was always welcome."
Igor, i didn't said anything like this in my post. I just said that there are a lot of problems whit Nero AAC.
Short question: is iTunes encoding MP4 too, or just M4A?
*

m4a is the same as mp4


--------------------
I know, that I know nothing (Socrates)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
minisu
post Jan 15 2006, 17:55
Post #88





Group: Members
Posts: 26
Joined: 27-February 05
Member No.: 20178



I don't like WMA, and not many players support WMA Pro IIRC. Lame performed good in this test but I tend to rate mp3 poorer than other codecs (maybe because with mp3 you know what you're looking for).

This leaves me with Vorbis and AAC. Which format drains less battery from a portal player? (kind of OT...)


--------------------
Opera bookmark synchronizer: http://osync.sf.net
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
moozooh
post Jan 15 2006, 17:58
Post #89





Group: Members
Posts: 356
Joined: 22-September 04
From: Moscow
Member No.: 17192



QUOTE (IgorC @ Jan 15 2006, 07:36 PM)
I didn't said nothing about  HE-AAC device's support. Could you point me?
*

You said AAC, not LC-AAC. How do I know it doesn't include all the profiles (especially considering HE/HE v2 is the most beneficial profile for AAC)?

AFAIR, HE is a part of the standard, and if you imply that AAC will be supported by all the aforementioned devices only because of that (which is fairly doubtful in real world), why not support the other part of that standard? (I could be wrong about it, though; discard the previous sentence if I am.)


--------------------
Infrasonic Quartet + Sennheiser HD650 + Microlab Solo 2 mk3. 
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jan 15 2006, 17:58
Post #90





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (bond @ Jan 15 2006, 05:51 PM)
aac isnt part of the normal audio formats in hddvd, its only part of the "rom-zone" whatever this mean. i dont even know if support is mandatory and i dunno how things are handled on bluray
*

So if AAC is currently supported by less audio devices as Vorbis and if it isn't a part of big multimedia project such as SACD, HD-DVD or BRD, it's more compatible with what? lalala.gif With hope? Dreams? wink.gif I have some troubles to explain to myself some claims. huh.gif
I really like AAC, as well as Vorbis, but I must say that I'm disappointed by the industry attitude and lack of interest for AAC.

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Jan 15 2006, 18:00
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Busemann
post Jan 15 2006, 17:59
Post #91





Group: Members
Posts: 730
Joined: 5-January 04
Member No.: 10970



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jan 15 2006, 08:27 AM)
That's interesting smile.gif Could I get the list of compatible AAC players?


The iPod family is AAC compatible of course, so in terms of market share AAC is a lot more widespread than OGG Vorbis. Then there's the emerging cell phone market which also excludes OGG in favor of AAC (Phones from Motorola, Sony Ericsson & Nokia are all AAC compatible). Then there's the PSP, which seems to support everything but OGG.. The list of OGG Vorbis players is fairly long, but most of them I haven't even heard of. I would say AAC is much much more future proof than OGG, simply because of its big user base and company support, excluding all the cheap Asian stuff.

This is not a bash of OGG. I think it's a great format, but I wouldn't encode my music with it if I were into portable DAP's.

Just my 2˘
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
moozooh
post Jan 15 2006, 18:07
Post #92





Group: Members
Posts: 356
Joined: 22-September 04
From: Moscow
Member No.: 17192



QUOTE (Busemann @ Jan 15 2006, 07:59 PM)
I would say AAC is much much more future proof than OGG, simply because of its big user base and company support, excluding all the cheap Asian stuff
*

I wouldn't say that only because market needs something absolutely royalty free, and that is the strongest point of Vorbis. Why pay for a standardised format when you can pay nothing at all and have the same quality? You can't discard that so easily.

Also, where did you read AAC has big user base? smile.gif

And another one: those "cheap Asian stuff" companies use the same chips as iPods, if not better. Almost all of the chips are produced in Asia.


--------------------
Infrasonic Quartet + Sennheiser HD650 + Microlab Solo 2 mk3. 
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bond
post Jan 15 2006, 18:07
Post #93





Group: Members
Posts: 881
Joined: 11-October 02
Member No.: 3523



well it still shouldnt be forgotten that the ipod simply dominates the market for handheld music players

there can be thousands of different players handling wma9 and it would still mean not much if only one player handling aac would have a marketshare of 90%


--------------------
I know, that I know nothing (Socrates)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jan 15 2006, 18:07
Post #94





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (Busemann @ Jan 15 2006, 05:59 PM)
QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jan 15 2006, 08:27 AM)
That's interesting smile.gif Could I get the list of compatible AAC players?


The iPod family is AAC compatible of course, so in terms of market share AAC is a lot more widespread than OGG Vorbis.
*


Of course, but it's just a market share. iPod is one and single family. If someone wants a:
- true UMS device
- or a very small device
- or a device working with AA or AAA cells
- or a gapless device
- or a non-MP3-suttering device
- or a very cheap device
- or a longer-battery life device
etc... this person has few chance to find something compatible with AAC. Simply because there's mainly one company producing AAC compatible players, and this company isn't interested to support one of the listed feature.

And if most manufacturers are unknown, there are companies like Samsung, iAudio, iRiver, LG, Iomega, MPIO, Neuros, Rio, TEAC which are widely available. My parents are living in a small village of 3000 souls, and even here the supermarket has Vorbis compatible players!

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Jan 15 2006, 18:09
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Jan 15 2006, 18:09
Post #95





Group: Members
Posts: 1506
Joined: 3-January 05
From: Argentina, Bs As
Member No.: 18803



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jan 15 2006, 08:58 AM)
So if AAC is currently supported by less audio devices as Vorbis and if it isn't a part of big multimedia project such as SACD, HD-DVD or BRD, it's more compatible with what? lalala.gif With hope? Dreams? wink.gif I have some troubles to explain to myself some claims. huh.gif
I really like AAC, as well as Vorbis, but I must say that I'm disappointed by the industry attitude and lack of interest for AAC.
*


That's why I said IMHO. If somebody has a audioplayer that supports only mp3 never will use aac,ogg.
Btw, can you also provide online music shops wich support OGG? AAC? MP3?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
moozooh
post Jan 15 2006, 18:11
Post #96





Group: Members
Posts: 356
Joined: 22-September 04
From: Moscow
Member No.: 17192



QUOTE (IgorC @ Jan 15 2006, 08:09 PM)
That's why I said IMHO.
*

IMHO, an IMHO must be backed up by something that has relevance in the real world. wink.gif


--------------------
Infrasonic Quartet + Sennheiser HD650 + Microlab Solo 2 mk3. 
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jan 15 2006, 18:14
Post #97





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (IgorC @ Jan 15 2006, 06:09 PM)
QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jan 15 2006, 08:58 AM)
So if AAC is currently supported by less audio devices as Vorbis and if it isn't a part of big multimedia project such as SACD, HD-DVD or BRD, it's more compatible with what? lalala.gif With hope? Dreams? wink.gif I have some troubles to explain to myself some claims. huh.gif
I really like AAC, as well as Vorbis, but I must say that I'm disappointed by the industry attitude and lack of interest for AAC.
*


That's why I said IMHO.
*


True. But I supposed that your opinion is surely based on objective facts. You can hardly say that AAC offers more compatible IMO if the current situation is showing the opposite.

QUOTE
Btw, can you also provide online music shops wich support OGG?  AAC? MP3?

That's indeed a good point. Neither MP3 or Vorbis are compatible with online music stores. iTunes Music Store is giving a big advantage to AAC here; unfortunately for AAC, Apple's closed attitude is making WMA Standard stronger; this format is now supported by most online shops. And there are more and more companies making WMA PlaysForSure a marketing argument.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Busemann
post Jan 15 2006, 18:21
Post #98





Group: Members
Posts: 730
Joined: 5-January 04
Member No.: 10970



QUOTE (Mo0zOoH @ Jan 15 2006, 09:07 AM)
And another one: those "cheap Asian stuff" companies use the same chips as iPods, if not better. Almost all of the chips are produced in Asia.
*

Of course, but there's more to a DAP than its chips. Most components in the tech industry are standardized
QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jan 15 2006, 09:07 AM)
Of course, but it's just a market share. iPod is one and single family. If someone wants a:
- true UMS device
- or a very small device
- or a device working with AA or AAA cells
- or a gapless device
- or a non-MP3-suttering device
- or a very cheap device
- or a longer-battery life device
etc... this person has few chance to find something compatible with AAC. Simply because there's mainly one company producing AAC compatible players, and this company isn't interested to support one of the listed feature.


First off, you should really take a second look at the iPod line as many of your requests are now implemented, such as small size, good battery, low price, etc. The lame-vbr stuttering doesn't even affect newer models.

Anyways, if you want total freedom you should just stick to mp3. When your AA-powered $20 supermarket ogg-player breaks, it sure is a lot better to have a library of universally compatible mp3s than Oggs.

This post has been edited by Busemann: Jan 15 2006, 18:22
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jan 15 2006, 18:28
Post #99





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (Busemann @ Jan 15 2006, 06:21 PM)
First off, you should really take a second look at the iPod line as many of your requests are now implemented, such as small size, good battery, low price, etc. The lame-vbr stuttering doesn't even affect newer models.
*

I don't want to start a iPod flame war (I like them and I even bought it once - which never worked...). But several flash players have a battery which last more than 40 hours; there are ultra-small flash players and the Shuffle is twice longer; Apple price are not ultra-expensive but they're not cheap; the sutter problem affect the Nano which is the latest model.
QUOTE
Anyways, if you want total freedom you should just stick to mp3. When your AA-powered $20 supermarket ogg-player breaks, it sure is a lot better to have a library of universally compatible mp3s than Oggs.

Everybody knows that. The fact is that the consumer looking for an alternate format has more choice for Vorbis compatible players than for AAC ones. That's why I wouldn't say that "AAC is the best tradeoff quality/compability". It can't be seriously defended by objective arguments.

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Jan 15 2006, 18:29
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Busemann
post Jan 15 2006, 18:30
Post #100





Group: Members
Posts: 730
Joined: 5-January 04
Member No.: 10970



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jan 15 2006, 09:28 AM)
The fact is that the consumer looking for an alternate format has more choice for Vorbis compatible players than for AAC ones. That's why I wouldn't say that "AAC is the best tradeoff quality/compability". It can't be seriously defended by objective arguments.
*


Versus OGG Vorbis it definitely can. There might be a gazzillion OGG players, but that doesn't matter as long as the market leaders don't support it (only one out of the top 20 mp3 players on Amazon.com supports OGG). There are more players supporting WMA than AAC too, but also there you're limited to the crappy players fighting for the 15% or so.

When OGG excludes the iPod, cell phones and PSP, then there's hardly "more choice" don't you agree?

This post has been edited by Busemann: Jan 15 2006, 19:01
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

8 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 6 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th April 2014 - 02:45