Hello.

Hopefully this will be the last poll. Please vote.

The codecs already decided upon are:
- Nero AACenc
- iTunes
- Faac
- Compaact!
- Real

Best regards;

Roberto.

From the last thread I thought this was going to be Winamp vs. l3enc vs. Compaact.

ff123

Argh. I was too tired to think properly. Please disregard that

lol
maybe it would be the best to make one and for all multiple choice poll with all left codecs (real, winamp, compaact, lame and l3enc) and allowing the users to do multiple votes

and in the end the ones with the most votes get used
that would be an easy and clear solution

rjamorim,

Could you kindly list the 5 programs that "made it" (not including this last anchor one)? I have seen so many different program lists for the test that my mind is spinning

Edit: Thanks for updating this thread with that list of programs that will be in the test. Please disregard my request above.

Invision does not allow multiple choices polls. Sorry.

I'm trying to juggle countless requests and complaints here, so please cut me some slack. :B

I'm also trying to adapt these decisions to a limited time frame.


@guest0101: Done.

i assume its

itunes
nero
faac
real
compaact

and winamp i really hope, cause it will surely be a very important encoder in the future (more important than compaact imho)

so vote for winamp all!!!


ah ic :B

done.

(/me is nice, bond, isn't he)

All I wanted, now there is campaigning to choose codecs at my tests.

"Vote for Compaact, he'll lower your taxes!"

Sure sign that I should retire soon from this enchilada

Ahh, yes, this feature is planned in future versions, how did you already know this?

Alexander

IMHO, every test like this should have an anchor. It makes things simpler. Just my 2 cents.

I changed my my mind. I did want a good anchor (l3enc) but to &^%# with it! There are way too many good AAC encoders to justify getting rid of one for an anchor. I'm going with Winamp.

You guys aren't being much helpful, you know? :B

Sure, Winamp is winning, but definitely not by a significative margin.

simply use 7 codecs

ahh, how tiresome this test will be (and how difficult, yes). atm it looks like winamp is going to win it, meaning no anchor......so be it.

Instead, I will use everything at 200kbps. And I will personally force you to ABX all of them. And you better be successful :B

hahaha.....i really really hope you aren't serious. 6 good aac codecs at 128 is one thing, but 200? thats pushing it.

Personally, I would have chosen the primary codecs differently, but... so be it.

Since it's not practical for WinAmp to be included in the main list and use Lame as an anchor, I gotta go with Lame even though it's not AAC and this is an aac test.

Lame is the one single codec that 'everybody' knows an can relate to. It puts everything else into perspective.

Of course, you will end up having lame re-compete against the aac winner in the multi-format test, but that just means that test should be a bit easier since they'll already be familiar with them.

And that does mean that a very very major AAC distribution won't be tested. WinAmp's AAC will likely be distributed more than iTunes, Nero, and Real combined.... And it wouldn't get tested.... But in spite of that, I still think Lame in there would allow everybody to actually relate the testing of all the AAC codecs to what they already know. Not just the winning codec.

I haven't been following all of these posts, but I assume the Winamp AAC encoder will be fixed before the test. Or there isn't a problem with it after all?

what about using ~96kbps?

bond, this aint about audio encodes for video, lol j/k... i would like to see winamp in this one, we already know aac is more efficient than mp3 in a lower bitrate. Lets prove the sixpacks that there is something else out there to encode AACs with rather than winamp. By this i mean, i hardly believe winamp's AAC will beat the others much more tunned and developed

Winamp. It deserves to be in this test based on the user-mass, and the long time it's been available. I've used Winamp since 0.x/1.0 beta versions, and it was the thing that really introduced me to audio compression, so i really appreciate it still, even though there are much more choices of players nowadays..

Wow, looks like we'll have a lot of participants in this test. Almost 40 votes for Winamp so far, and I assume every single one of those who voted for it is ready to sit through ABXing 12 samples on 6 near-transparency codecs. Because it would be rather cynical to demand that from others but refusing to do it yourself, wouldn't it?

It definitely would. And that's why I tried to make clear people should consider the fatigue introduced by adding a 6th competitor.

Ironically, I believe a great deal of the Winamp voters (or voters in general) will not participate. They vote for Winamp because they are just interested on how it would perform and let the others do the hard work.

Heh, perhaps you should've split the Winamp (and Lame) options in two, each: Winamp, yes I will participate; Winamp, no, I won't participate.

I know. I expect no more than 30 results per sample. That's how things go...

we do it for them anyway. i wanted to participate in your MP3 test but i didn't have the time, at the time. i plan on making time for this test as i have tried very hard to make my opinion heard and would like to contribute,

its a shame that my first serious test will be so difficult. oh well.

No, it won't.

I'm tired and I'm stressed.

These tests are not fun anymore, it's only politics I deal with and everyone wanting their own desires fullfilled, fuck the rest.

I stay in the middle taking the heat and trying to juggle everybody's request.

Never before I had to create polls for my tests, we could always agree on a common ground that satisfied most participants. This time I had to create three, and none of them with significant and usable results, mind you.

I started doing this out of personal interest and to further knowledge in these areas, but I feel that both of these are becoming moot points. Organising and choosing samples has now taken a second place to sitting center stage in tired arguments about formats and methodologies, and with that the amount of time and effort I put in is just not reaping the rewards I hope for. In my opinion, testing is becoming more obscure, now that the major tests have been conducted and audio formats have not made vast leaps in the last 3 months, I will either be repeating myself or going down narrow and uninspiring avenues with further tests.

So, I plan to conduce the multiformat test next month, the dial-up bitrate test on April, and then I plan to retire from the testing scene. I hope if the demand is still high, somebody else can assume the role of coordinator and continue to provide illuminating results.


Anyway: since the poll here is more or less tied, simply there will be no 6th codec. IMO it's also for the better, since the test will be much less fatiguing this way.

Sorry if that decision is unpleasant to some.


Best regards;

Roberto José de Amorim.

@Roberto:

I think this test will go just fine with no 6th codec. Simple is better.

And you deserve more appreciation than you ever hear. A few others have stepped up and offered to run tests, and many have participated in tests as well, but no one has dedicated themselves to proving the capabilities of encoding formats here as much as you and ff123 have.

No one should ever forget that.

I agree wholeheartedly with what ScorLibran just said .

It's time you relaxed buddy, let the world digest all the useful results you have overseen and improve from there If somebody complains and asks for a 32kb test between 9 competitors you can rightfully suggest they do it themselves!

I would like to see how audio compression has advanced since the first mp3 encoder.

I trust Roberto, voted for l3enc. Well, if Winamp wins the poll, I hope it will still be fun!
@Roberto: don't let them take you down! You are doing a great job of finding a compromise for everyone.

Peace

Read the thread, dudes!

I think this is a good desicion. It is, of course much, better than an anchor that would be (nearly) as troublesome to detect as the AAC competitors.

hm i am not happy with this but its your test...

maybe for the next time there could be a forum software update installed which allows multiple choice polls, if possible
and you simply ignore all comments and simply let the poll speek for itself


well as a last statement i really think its a failure not to include winamp, cause imho it has the potential to become one of the most popular aac encoders, simply because it comes with a popular tool (i dont think that more people will use real or compaact for aac encoding)