128 kb Multiformat listening test..., ...based on classical music samples ONLY Options

[evereux]

Very interesting test, thanks Guru.

Re: aacenc

1. There's already a new codec.

We didn't see that coming ...

[JohnV]

I give 1/10 for 2.5.9.7 CBR 128, 2/10 for 2.5.9.7 streaming (> 150 kbps) and something between 6 and 7/10 for 2.6.0.3 CBR 128 [I'm listening on a portable that can't drive correctly my headphone].
The terrible metallic effect/ringing/flanging and I don't know what else are gone. There are still slight problems on brass instruments, but in comparison, it's heaven. I hope that these awful frequencies gap (Nero speciality on classical) are past now.
Is this new encoder faster?

I knew you'd like the new codec more.

Well, the SFE method should be somewhat faster, but it can be slower also in some situations. Anyway, it's still quite new method, so there should be plenty of margin for improvement still.

[guruboolez]

Thank you for the clarification. I really come too early this time with my test... I didn't expect a new Nero version before one month. Bah, the next test will be more interesting for me

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Dec 13 2003, 19:37

[fairyliquidizer]

Excellent work. I'm going to be encoding my classical collection for my iPod this afternoon, once I have finished the Indie section. I'll stick with iTunes (sorry Nero) although the scores are high enough to leave me asking should I stick with 128k or go for 160. I think I'll do my classical collection at 160 and home that QT performs even better with more bits :-)

My main impression is that the scores are surprisingly high. The maturity of LAME has helped here and Ogg continues to show promise. Ogg and AAC are very impressive CODECs, and Apple deserves some praise for it's high quality implementation.

Love and peace,
Fairy