IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
AAC - 96 kbps, Intensity Stereo Test
Ivan Dimkovic
post Dec 25 2005, 02:30
Post #1


Nero MPEG4 developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1466
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 8



For the upcoming brand new AAC encoder from Nero we just implemented Intensity Stereo, too wink.gif

This was the very old discussion in AAC-Tech forum whether IS should be used or not - and, indeed, how much it degrades sound image and how much it brings in improved overal distortion-level...

So, here is the first test with Nero's new encoder which is currently in development (signalled as 4.9.9.9 this time wink.gif

Files are encoded in 96 kbps CBR - to maximize the "pressure" on the codec psymodel/bit-rate-allocator - and following files are covered:

castanets -> pre echo clip
dr4 -> trumpet with strong harmonic components
es02 -> German speech
French_ad -> French Ad, also speech but with music in background
Layla -> strong applause in both channels that makes lossy stereo very tricky
Si02 -> pre echo clip
Sm01 -> highly tonal clip
Velvet -> speciality for stereo coding wink.gif almost completely uncorrelated channels
Waiting -> we all know what is it...
youcantdothat -> also strong channel separation

I chose 96 kbps to measure how much IS degrades the quality, at bit rates of 64 kbps it is clear that IS definitely outweights any of its disadvantages... but as we go up, it is interesting to check.

Also I selected very worst test items, just to make it even harder for the codec smile.gif

Note - IS implementation in this version is still not final, and it will for sure be improved even more before the launch.

Attached are packed IS and non-IS files (1.65 mb each)... original flacs coming soon wink.gif

Edit - added files with better IS perceptual control

This post has been edited by Ivan Dimkovic: Dec 25 2005, 19:37
Attached File(s)
Attached File  aac_96kbps_cbr_no_is.rar ( 1.66MB ) Number of downloads: 456
Attached File  aac_96kbps_cbr_with_is.rar ( 1.65MB ) Number of downloads: 442
Attached File  aac_96kbps_cbr_with_is2.rar ( 1.65MB ) Number of downloads: 457
 
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ivan Dimkovic
post Dec 25 2005, 02:42
Post #2


Nero MPEG4 developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1466
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 8



And... the flacs wink.gif
Attached File(s)
Attached File  castanets.flac ( 621.81K ) Number of downloads: 500
Attached File  dr4.flac ( 1.16MB ) Number of downloads: 366
Attached File  es02.flac ( 482.46K ) Number of downloads: 376
Attached File  French_Ad.flac ( 912.28K ) Number of downloads: 403
Attached File  Layla.flac ( 2.2MB ) Number of downloads: 423
Attached File  sm01.flac ( 1MB ) Number of downloads: 406
Attached File  VELVET.flac ( 1.36MB ) Number of downloads: 407
Attached File  Waiting.flac ( 2.29MB ) Number of downloads: 406
Attached File  youcantdothat.flac ( 3.43MB ) Number of downloads: 449
Attached File  si02.flac ( 625.48K ) Number of downloads: 570
 
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ivan Dimkovic
post Dec 25 2005, 02:44
Post #3


Nero MPEG4 developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1466
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 8



Another note - most likely, IS won't be used at this bit rate, or it will be used in much reduced way than it is in this test - purpose of the demo is to check amount of stereo reduction (if any) and some other artifacts it might introduce.

Few of those are already known and we are working on them wink.gif

So, at lower bitates (e.g. 48-80 kbps) we might improve listening experience over common LC-AAC implementations even more for those without ability to use HE-AAC wink.gif

This post has been edited by Ivan Dimkovic: Dec 25 2005, 02:46
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Dec 25 2005, 03:32
Post #4





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



Short ABX tests before jumping in a warm bed.
Keep in mind that I haven't PCM files as reference; I only compared both encodings and tried to find encoding artifacts.

CODE

foo_abx 1.3 report
foobar2000 v0.9 beta 12
2005/12/25 03:08:59

File A: C:\HA - noŽl 2005\NERO Intensity Stereo\french_Ad.mp4
File B: C:\HA - noŽl 2005\NERO Intensity Stereo\french_Ad_IS.mp4

03:08:59 : Test started.
03:09:40 : 01/01 50.0%
03:09:47 : 02/02 25.0%
03:09:54 : 03/03 12.5%
03:09:59 : 04/04 6.3%
03:10:05 : 05/05 3.1%
03:10:11 : 06/06 1.6%
03:10:16 : 07/07 0.8%
03:10:25 : 08/08 0.4%
03:10:27 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 8/8 (0.4%)

The IS encoding sounds noisier on the beginning (little pshhh audible on both encodings but slightly higher with IS). Difference is rather small.


CODE

foo_abx 1.3 report
foobar2000 v0.9 beta 12
2005/12/25 03:13:19

File A: C:\HA - noŽl 2005\NERO Intensity Stereo\dr4.mp4
File B: C:\HA - noŽl 2005\NERO Intensity Stereo\dr4_IS.mp4

03:13:19 : Test started.
03:13:44 : 01/01 50.0%
03:13:52 : 02/02 25.0%
03:14:02 : 03/03 12.5%
03:14:08 : 04/04 6.3%
03:14:18 : 05/05 3.1%
03:14:37 : 06/06 1.6%
03:14:44 : 07/07 0.8%
03:15:04 : 07/08 3.5%
03:15:10 : 08/09 2.0%
03:15:15 : 09/10 1.1%
03:15:17 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 9/10 (1.1%)

[11.00 - 13.00] The loudest trumpet note is distorted (it sounds like ringing on a very short moment) with IS encoding. The other one is less disturbing.
Additional note: the distortion is also audible on the beginning (two first seconds). This time both encodings are concerned, but IS is really more unpleasant to my ears. It's not really ringing, but noise or fat sounding.
Additional note No.2: sample sm01 suffers from ringing (more with IS), but I haven't ABXed it yet.

CODE

foo_abx 1.3 report
foobar2000 v0.9 beta 12
2005/12/25 03:15:48

File A: C:\HA - noŽl 2005\NERO Intensity Stereo\castanets.mp4
File B: C:\HA - noŽl 2005\NERO Intensity Stereo\castanets_IS.mp4

03:15:48 : Test started.
03:16:12 : 01/01 50.0%
03:16:18 : 02/02 25.0%
03:16:24 : 03/03 12.5%
03:16:38 : 04/04 6.3%
03:16:43 : 04/05 18.8%
03:16:50 : 05/06 10.9%
03:17:00 : 05/07 22.7%
03:17:05 : 06/08 14.5%
03:17:10 : 07/09 9.0%
03:17:23 : 07/10 17.2%
03:17:34 : 08/11 11.3%
03:17:46 : 08/12 19.4%
03:17:54 : 09/13 13.3%
03:18:30 : 09/14 21.2%
03:18:35 : 10/15 15.1%
03:18:38 : 10/16 22.7%
03:18:43 : 10/17 31.5%
03:18:45 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/17 (31.5%)

I heard more smearing for IS during the introduction (guitar + ta-ta-ta-ta) but I decided to ABX something which isn't located on the very beginning. I failed :/

This is all for this night. Now, bed. Tomorrow, some other files smile.gif
P.S. The german speech sample sounds really bad, with aggressive whispering I can sometimes heard on TV. Are your encodings transcoded from a lossy source?

P.S.2: hardware setting = AC97 component crying.gif + Philips HP910 headphone

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Dec 25 2005, 03:33
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ivan Dimkovic
post Dec 25 2005, 03:36
Post #5


Nero MPEG4 developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1466
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 8



Thanks Guru for the quick test! Also warm bed is waiting me, too wink.gif

Regarding ES02... please download the .flac file - it is not transcoded or processed in any way, and encoded files are very close to it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Dec 25 2005, 03:45
Post #6





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



You're right: the reference disturbs me as well (only the 00.600-04.600 range - the rest sounds OK).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ivan Dimkovic
post Dec 25 2005, 15:40
Post #7


Nero MPEG4 developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1466
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 8



Some more perceptual optimizations are done - I'll try to post new IS clips at the same bitrate soon.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ivan Dimkovic
post Dec 25 2005, 19:07
Post #8


Nero MPEG4 developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1466
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 8



Ok, here are the files with refined IS algo (more perceptual control)
Attached File(s)
Attached File  aac_96kbps_cbr_with_is2.rar ( 1.65MB ) Number of downloads: 350
 
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Dec 25 2005, 22:42
Post #9





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



It's test really not for 10$ edifier 6631 and generic audio card smile.gif

CODE
ABC/HR Version 1.1 beta 2, 18 June 2004
Testname: IS2 and NO_IS

1L = C:\music\waiting abx\1 Waiting is2.wav
2L = C:\music\waiting abx\2 Waiting no is.wav

 0 of   1, p = 1.000
 0 of   2, p = 1.000
 1 of   3, p = 0.875
 2 of   4, p = 0.688
 3 of   5, p = 0.500
 4 of   6, p = 0.344
 5 of   7, p = 0.227
 5 of   8, p = 0.363
FINISHED


---------------------------------------
General Comments:

---------------------------------------
ABX Results:
C:\music\waiting abx\1 Waiting is2.wav vs C:\music\waiting abx\2 Waiting no is.wav
† †5 out of 8, pval = 0.363


This post has been edited by IgorC: Dec 25 2005, 22:43
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
IgorC
post Dec 26 2005, 05:26
Post #10





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



QUOTE (Ivan Dimkovic @ Dec 24 2005, 05:44 PM)
So, at lower bitates (e.g. 48-80 kbps) we might improve listening experience over common LC-AAC implementations even more for those without ability to use HE-AAC† wink.gif
*


CT supports HE-AAC up to 128 kbit/s. After some abx test ( Winamp 5.12 CT encoder vs Nero 4.9.9.9 for the samples of this topic ) I found that CT encoder can be on par with LC-AAC at 96 kbit/s or even beter on some samples like Waiting and Layla

Indeed there should be a test to determine if statement that SBR is usefull only up to 80 kbit/s is still truely.

This post has been edited by IgorC: Dec 26 2005, 05:35
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ivan Dimkovic
post Dec 26 2005, 11:29
Post #11


Nero MPEG4 developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1466
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 8



For 96kbps there is also choice of single-rate SBR (downsampled SBR) - where AAC codec would operate at 44.1 kHz - thus eliminating SBR pre-echo issues a lot.

Our new codec also supports that, and it would be very interesting to check if this mode outperforms LC-AAC and usual dual-rate HE-AAC at this bit rate.

This post has been edited by Ivan Dimkovic: Dec 26 2005, 11:30
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sebastian Mares
post Dec 26 2005, 12:16
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 3629
Joined: 14-May 03
From: Bad Herrenalb
Member No.: 6613



Some quick tests:

No IS vs. Original:

CODE
foo_abx 1.3 report
foobar2000 v0.9 beta 13
2005/12/26 11:53:21

File A: D:\Neuer Ordner\aac_96kbps_cbr_no_is\Layla.mp4
File B: D:\Neuer Ordner\Layla.flac

11:53:21 : Test started.
11:53:33 : 01/01 50.0%
11:53:39 : 02/02 25.0%
11:54:44 : 03/03 12.5%
11:54:48 : 04/04 6.3%
11:54:57 : 05/05 3.111:55:00 : 06/06 1.6%
11:55:11 : 07/07 0.8%
11:55:19 : 08/08 0.4%
11:56:01 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 8/8 (0.4%)


IS vs. Original:

CODE
foo_abx 1.3 report
foobar2000 v0.9 beta 13
2005/12/26 11:59:29

File A: D:\Neuer Ordner\Layla.flac
File B: D:\Neuer Ordner\aac_96kbps_cbr_with_is\Layla.mp4

11:59:29 : Test started.
11:59:37 : 01/01 50.0%
11:59:44 : 02/02 25.0%
11:59:47 : 03/03 12.5%
11:59:51 : 04/04 6.3%
11:59:54 : 05/05 3.1%
12:00:03 : 06/06 1.6%
12:00:06 : 07/07 0.8%
12:00:09 : 08/08 0.4%
12:00:10 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 8/8 (0.4%)


IS2 vs. Original:

CODE
foo_abx 1.3 report
foobar2000 v0.9 beta 13
2005/12/26 12:00:42

File A: D:\Neuer Ordner\Layla.flac
File B: D:\Neuer Ordner\aac_96kbps_cbr_with_is2\Layla.mp4

12:00:42 : Test started.
12:00:51 : 01/01 50.0%
12:00:54 : 02/02 25.0%
12:00:57 : 03/03 12.5%
12:00:59 : 04/04 6.3%
12:01:01 : 05/05 3.1%
12:01:03 : 06/06 1.6%
12:01:04 : 07/07 0.8%
12:01:06 : 07/08 3.5%
12:01:12 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 7/8 (3.5%)


No IS vs. IS:

CODE
foo_abx 1.3 report
foobar2000 v0.9 beta 13
2005/12/26 12:02:00

File A: D:\Neuer Ordner\aac_96kbps_cbr_no_is\Layla.mp4
File B: D:\Neuer Ordner\aac_96kbps_cbr_with_is\Layla.mp4

12:02:00 : Test started.
12:02:14 : 01/01 50.0%
12:03:00 : 02/02 25.0%
12:03:18 : 03/03 12.5%
12:03:22 : 04/04 6.3%
12:03:33 : 05/05 3.1%
12:04:04 : 06/06 1.6%
12:04:10 : 07/07 0.8%
12:04:13 : 07/08 3.5%
12:04:15 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 7/8 (3.5%)


No IS vs. IS2:

CODE
foo_abx 1.3 report
foobar2000 v0.9 beta 13
2005/12/26 12:06:10

File A: D:\Neuer Ordner\aac_96kbps_cbr_no_is\Layla.mp4
File B: D:\Neuer Ordner\aac_96kbps_cbr_with_is2\Layla.mp4

12:06:10 : Test started.
12:06:31 : 01/01 50.0%
12:06:34 : 01/02 75.0%
12:06:38 : 02/03 50.0%
12:06:40 : 03/04 31.3%
12:06:54 : 03/05 50.0%
12:07:09 : 04/06 34.4%
12:07:13 : 04/07 50.0%
12:07:16 : 05/08 36.3%
12:07:18 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 5/8 (36.3%)


IS vs. IS2:

CODE
foo_abx 1.3 report
foobar2000 v0.9 beta 13
2005/12/26 12:07:47

File A: D:\Neuer Ordner\aac_96kbps_cbr_with_is\Layla.mp4
File B: D:\Neuer Ordner\aac_96kbps_cbr_with_is2\Layla.mp4

12:07:47 : Test started.
12:08:33 : 00/01 100.0%
12:08:36 : 00/02 100.0%
12:08:41 : 00/03 100.0%
12:08:44 : 01/04 93.8%
12:08:47 : 01/05 96.9%
12:08:51 : 02/06 89.1%
12:08:53 : 03/07 77.3%
12:08:56 : 04/08 63.7%
12:08:58 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 4/8 (63.7%)


Conclusion: all are more or less distinguishable from the original. When it comes to IS vs. no IS, no IS sounds better to my ears. For IS vs. IS2, no idea. I think IS2 was a bit better, but as you can see from the ABX logs, I didn't manage to get an acceptable result.

I also noticed that IS has an artifact during the first few seconds of applause. It produces something like a "Krr".

This post has been edited by Sebastian Mares: Dec 26 2005, 12:21


--------------------
http://listening-tests.hydrogenaudio.org/sebastian/
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ivan Dimkovic
post Dec 26 2005, 12:23
Post #13


Nero MPEG4 developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1466
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 8



Thanks IgorC, Sebastian,

We will continue to improve IS (some more things are left to be done) - but I also think IS should be used at bit rates lower than 96 kbps - perhaps 80 and definitely 64 kbps.

Interesting is that I definitely found out that IS in AAC is much better than IS in MP3 - because AAC has TNS tool, which should shape the noise to avoid IS articacts of bad noise positioning in the R channel (thus generating failed stereo image)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
freelancer
post Jan 7 2006, 07:25
Post #14





Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 7-January 06
Member No.: 26938



Glad to hear Nero is doing something new to AAC, I've a question that is the AAC+IS require the IS support from AAC decoder just like SBR and PS does?
My new mobile phone seems to only support LC-AAC, so I can't get any benifit from HE-AAC, if LC+IS doesn't require decoder's special support, that could be cool to me.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Garf
post Jan 7 2006, 12:12
Post #15


Server Admin


Group: Admin
Posts: 4853
Joined: 24-September 01
Member No.: 13



IS is a part of the original, very first, MPEG 2 LC-AAC spec, so *all* AAC decoders have support for it.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
freelancer
post Jan 7 2006, 13:05
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 10
Joined: 7-January 06
Member No.: 26938



QUOTE (Garf @ Jan 7 2006, 07:12 PM)
IS is a part of the original, very first, MPEG 2 LC-AAC spec, so *all* AAC decoders have support for it.
*

Thanks Garf, glad to hear that. But why IS is already supported by decoders but no encoders support IS till now?(except the coming Nero encoder tongue.gif )
And when can we expect to have a public test version of Nero AAC encoder that supports IS? laugh.gif And did you do any internal comparison about LC+IS and HE-AAC at 64/80 Kbps? I'm interested at which one could win
Or it is possible to use HE+IS+PS in the future? biggrin.gif

This post has been edited by freelancer: Jan 7 2006, 13:05
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Garf
post Jan 9 2006, 18:45
Post #17


Server Admin


Group: Admin
Posts: 4853
Joined: 24-September 01
Member No.: 13



QUOTE (freelancer @ Jan 7 2006, 02:05 PM)
QUOTE (Garf @ Jan 7 2006, 07:12 PM)
IS is a part of the original, very first, MPEG 2 LC-AAC spec, so *all* AAC decoders have support for it.
*

Thanks Garf, glad to hear that. But why IS is already supported by decoders but no encoders support IS till now?(except the coming Nero encoder tongue.gif )


It appears to be quite tricky to use correctly.

QUOTE
And when can we expect to have a public test version of Nero AAC encoder that supports IS? laugh.gif And did you do any internal comparison about LC+IS and HE-AAC at 64/80 Kbps? I'm interested at which one could win
Or it is possible to use HE+IS+PS in the future? biggrin.gif
*


We are still looking into this. For close calls we may do further public tests here.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gameplaya15143
post Mar 4 2006, 16:47
Post #18





Group: Members
Posts: 484
Joined: 8-January 06
From: Earth
Member No.: 26978



QUOTE (Ivan Dimkovic @ Dec 26 2005, 05:29 AM)
For 96kbps there is also choice of single-rate SBR (downsampled SBR) - where AAC codec would operate at 44.1 kHz - thus eliminating SBR pre-echo issues a lot.

Our new codec also supports that, and it would be very interesting to check if this mode outperforms LC-AAC and usual dual-rate HE-AAC at this bit rate.
*

so does single rate/downsampled sbr mean that the lc-aac part would be 44.1khz and the sbr part would also be 44.1khz?

if so, i think it would outperform lc-aac and dual rate he-aac


--------------------
Vorbis-q0-lowpass99
lame3.93.1-q5-V9-k-nspsytune
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Garf
post Mar 5 2006, 10:38
Post #19


Server Admin


Group: Admin
Posts: 4853
Joined: 24-September 01
Member No.: 13



QUOTE (gameplaya15143 @ Mar 4 2006, 05:47 PM)
so does single rate/downsampled sbr mean that the lc-aac part would be 44.1khz and the sbr part would also be 44.1khz?


SBR runs at 88.2kHz but gets downsampled (hence the name).

QUOTE
if so, i think it would outperform lc-aac and dual rate he-aac
*


I don't think anything, I am SURE it needs to be TESTED.

This post has been edited by Garf: Mar 5 2006, 10:39
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
gameplaya15143
post Mar 6 2006, 03:39
Post #20





Group: Members
Posts: 484
Joined: 8-January 06
From: Earth
Member No.: 26978



QUOTE (Garf @ Mar 5 2006, 04:38 AM)
SBR runs at 88.2kHz but gets downsampled (hence the name).

I don't think anything, I am SURE it needs to be TESTED.

thanks, I get it now

sure it would need testing... but if the lc-aac part isn't forced down to half the samplerate (22.05khz) then sbr wont have as much bandwidth to cover (instead of the entire top half, maybe just the top fourth) my speculation here is based on plusV fullrate (44.1khz mp3 + 44.1khz plusV)... we shall see how it goes when it gets tested though smile.gif


--------------------
Vorbis-q0-lowpass99
lame3.93.1-q5-V9-k-nspsytune
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 21st April 2014 - 09:07