Quicktime TVBR vs Nero AAC Options

[pgm86]

hi guys, what's the general consensus between the two? which is better for encoding using vbr? thanks

[lvqcl]

You can use Quicktime AAC in foobar2000 too.

[SamDeRe81]

You can use Quicktime AAC in foobar2000 too.

You're saying there's a commandline encoder for QuickTime I can just download? Because I'm using Ubuntu Maverick with WINE and foobar2000 to do the volume normalizations and converting with NeroAACEnc. For some reason LAME wouldn't work with WINE it kept giving me demands for various extra files, doesn't matter since AAC is superior anyway.

[list]

You can use Quicktime AAC in foobar2000 too.

You're saying there's a commandline encoder for QuickTime I can just download?

http://tmkk.pv.land.to/qtaacenc/
but it needs quick time installed
for me, @ >128 kbps QT gives much better results than Nero

This post has been edited by list: Feb 8 2011, 02:23

[greynol]

for me, @ >128 kbps QT gives much better results than Nero

Samples and logged ABX results, please!

Perhaps the Nero developers may find it useful, no?

[punkrockdude]

for me, @ >128 kbps QT gives much better results than Nero

Samples and logged ABX results, please!

Perhaps the Nero developers may find it useful, no?

I also find Quicktime to be a lot better than Nero around 128kbps. It's easy to hear when you compare so that's why I haven't done an ABX.

[kornchild2002]

I also find Quicktime to be a lot better than Nero around 128kbps. It's easy to hear when you compare so that's why I haven't done an ABX.

ABX tests are needed, it doesn't matter how "easy" you think it is to hear as you could very well be suffering from the placebo affect. Proper testing is required before anyone makes subjective audio claims, period. That is in the TOS (specifically TOS #8) that everyone agrees upon when joining the site. So proper test results are needed from both you and list before any audio quality claims can be taken seriously. That and the Nero devs would like to know the performance of their encoder and just what samples their encoder is having issues with. That way they can fine tune their encoder so that Apple's is not "much better" and comparing the two won't be so "easy to hear."

[punkrockdude]

I also find Quicktime to be a lot better than Nero around 128kbps. It's easy to hear when you compare so that's why I haven't done an ABX.

ABX tests are needed, it doesn't matter how "easy" you think it is to hear as you could very well be suffering from the placebo affect. Proper testing is required before anyone makes subjective audio claims, period. That is in the TOS (specifically TOS #8) that everyone agrees upon when joining the site. So proper test results are needed from both you and list before any audio quality claims can be taken seriously. That and the Nero devs would like to know the performance of their encoder and just what samples their encoder is having issues with. That way they can fine tune their encoder so that Apple's is not "much better" and comparing the two won't be so "easy to hear."

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.2
2011/02/09 22:37:54

File A: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 prodigy\prodigy nero.m4a
File B: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 prodigy\prodigy.wv

22:37:54 : Test started.
22:38:41 : 01/01 50.0%
22:39:17 : 02/02 25.0%
22:40:05 : 03/03 12.5%
22:40:57 : 04/04 6.3%
22:41:45 : 05/05 3.1%
22:42:09 : 06/06 1.6%
22:42:46 : 07/07 0.8%
22:43:09 : 08/08 0.4%
22:43:49 : 09/09 0.2%
22:44:14 : 10/10 0.1%
22:44:19 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/10 (0.1%)

foo_abx 1.3.4 report
foobar2000 v1.1.2
2011/02/09 22:45:50

File A: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 prodigy\prodigy qt.m4a
File B: E:\Documents and Settings\Administratör\Mina dokument\128kbps test\128 prodigy\prodigy.wv

22:45:50 : Test started.
22:46:32 : 01/01 50.0%
22:46:58 : 01/02 75.0%
22:47:29 : 02/03 50.0%
22:47:38 : 03/04 31.3%
22:47:51 : 04/05 18.8%
22:48:19 : 05/06 10.9%
22:48:51 : 06/07 6.3%
22:49:38 : 07/08 3.5%
22:50:40 : 07/09 9.0%
22:51:34 : 08/10 5.5%
22:51:48 : 09/11 3.3%
22:52:32 : 10/12 1.9%
22:52:36 : Test finished.

----------
Total: 10/12 (1.9%)