This may be a dumb question so i have been hesitant to ask, but will anyway.

I have noticed in many forums, including this one, that no one mentions using AAC at bit rates of 256 and up. The discussions center around the quality from the 64 to 192 range. This is unlike MP3, where alt prest standard and extreme are common compression algorithms, and have bit rates from 200-250.

Does AAC offer no noticeable quality improvement once the bit rate exceeds 192? If the lack of discussion is indicative, then I'm guessing it does not.

I'm more interested from the aspect of playing AAC encoded CDs in high end stereo equipment (hopefully DVD players will soon support this format like MP3!!!) then from an iPod listening perspective where the general consensus is AAC 192 is as good as it gets on an iPod.

AAC 192 is transparent for most people. Transparency is transparency, and 256 kbps can't be more transparent (though the objective quality is better). So it doesn't offer significant progress (except for killer sample of course, and even here, difference is not obvious for everyone).

MP3 situation is not so different. Most people are using --alt-preset standard / -V2, which is close to 192 kbps on average. Most people consider the extreme preset as a waste of space.

For "high end stereo equipment", I would recommand lossless rather than AAC or any lossy format.

I don't know of any plans for any players to support lossless. Its a "PC only" format, with some very limited portable support.

Also, if I am going to play lossless, I may as well just stick with the original CD or red book. Lossless is only about a 30% improvement in songs per CD for rock music. Where as a format like MP3 APS or APE is a 5:1 improvement in songs per CD.

But I do understand your point - which is "preserve the original quality".

Lossless encoding is a "niche" but since one year, things are changing. Microsoft has a lossless format, same thing for Real, for Apple. MPEG-4 will follow in the next months. Industrial partners of big software editors will probably support some of these new formats on multimedia device (it's already the case with Apple lossless, supported by Apple ).

But I understand your point. Up to a recent date, I enjoyed the idea of playing HQ lossy files on decent hi-fi equipment.
High Bitrate encoding are important for your security feeling (quality headroom). Even if 192 seems to be enough, using higher bitrate is not completely pointless. Transparency is linked to your subjectivity, and subjectivity is not something static: your listening abilities may improve with time. In other words, you could find artifacts in one or two years. "Transparency" is a fragile condition.

Therefore, if space doesn't matter too much, I'd recommand you 256 or 320 kbps lossy encodings. If space doesn't matter at all, lossless is fine. In both case (lossy AAC or lossless format), you need to wait for hardware support.

AFAIK there are many players that support lossless, like the rio karma, neurus, and others ... i still prefer aps to it .

I believe the Neuros doesn't support lossless. I couldn't find any information about it at their site, at least.

Even with a high-quality DVD player, I would question in general how high of quality the playback of 2ndary formats would be.

But I digress..



Don't forget to add TTA.

Will Neuros support any lossless formats like Shorten or FLAC?

FLAC, an open-source lossless compression codec, was officially adopted in February, 2003, by Xiph.org (see Ogg entry above). As part of our relationship with Xiph, we will be exploring the possibilities of supporting FLAC playback and encoding on the Neuros.

so "maybe"?

I had never even heard of that brand "Neuston" :B

Ipod? And if lossless is too big for your portable, foobar w/foo_pod will automattically convert any lossless files you tell it to add to an Ipod to AAC and then add the AAC files to your Ipod.

Ever since i started encoding in AAC i have used the Nero VBR Transcoding/Ultra preset, just to be on the safe side. It gives a bitrate between 250-350, but most people here would prob. consider it overkill.

Well, of course the iPod supports it, the discussion revolved around playing AAC on home stereo systems or on car audio systems. AAC has wide support on the PC, but not too many have their PC as their stereo system yet - and certainly not their car system. The iPod broadcast to 88.1 set up is not very desirable for optimal sound quality.



That is welcome news. I have been archiving on CD all encodings in Apple Lossless.