It looks like a long time to wait for the official Nero release of HE-AAC PS. I'm wondering when I can taste it.

Try this - http://home.cwru.edu/~bes7/db_EnhAACPlus_1.2.zip

it's produce better quality then Nero He-aac PS samples

Says who?

I think it's the encoder attached. It works, makes mp4 output. I'm not sure the quality since I didn't ABX it yet, but in my foobar2000, it shows LC AAC (24kb/s@44.1kHz stereo). I think it should be Enhanced aacplus.

use different bitrates for better quality for example 32000 or 35999 (max He-aac PS in this encoder)

noted. thanks!

I am only getting 22 KHz regardless of the bitrate I am using...

Not exactly - you get 44khz (with SBR)- but your player (decoder) plays only 22khz. Use better player for example Foobar2000, Nero, ffdshow, betaplayer (on pocketpc)

To be very honest, I don't understand why people are so thrilled by HE AAC+PS. I too was thrilled by HE AAC when it was about to be launched, and today I notice I used it precisely once: on my 64kbps listening test.

PS applies to even lower bitrates (no more than 48kbps), so it'll have an even more limited appeal. I can only understand people cheering about it if they are running online broadcast stations targeted at dial-up users.

Quite right - winamp was showing 22 in the player, but the file info showed 44 - Apologies.

I must say the 48 Kbps aacPlus streams on SomaFM sound unreal. I am unable to get anywhere near the sound quality unless I get the bitrate closer to 100 Kbps and a bandwidth over 12000 Hz

Just very fast comparison
60 kbit/s
http://rapidshare.de/files/1802706/NERO_inet.mp4.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/1802732/413gp.mp4.html

Nero 58 kbit/s , AAC+2v 60kbit/s , but both have a same filesize

Quality isn´t for store music but for video mux (movie, not musical concerts) is acceptable.

For portable user, low bitrate brings low data bandwidth, low power consumption, low CPU performance. It's helpful for cell phone, if you accept the sound quality when you on the road...

But are there portables and cells supporting HE AAC+PS?



I don't think those really apply to PS... power consumption will be considerable no matter if bitrates are low or not.

PocketPC's

Symbian will, too.

whoa....nice....it even sounds better than nero he-aac @64k

What? Compared to what? On what? At what bitrate? With what blind result?

Yes, that´s would be interesting to do some full ABX test will a lot of samples. Sometimes AAC+2_3gp is better than nero HE-AAC, in other situations it´s hard to spot difference.

Is there even a point to ABX'ing at bitrates this low? I mean when we're talking sub-64kbps, it's not going to sound anything like the original sample. I would figure the goal is just to sound the best, not necessarily more accurate.

That's why I say "blind test" and not "ABX test".

For audiobooks, this might be wonderful. My audiobooks could be encoded in stereo at low bitrates!

compared to nero he-aac 64kbps it sounds more like the original....and the lowpass is more realistic than the one nero sets, nero uses 20.6khz lowpass for 64kbps and the fhg encoder uses 15.8khz lowpass for 64kbps, that may be part of the reason for the better performance....no abx was needed, the difference was clear.

something i did notice though was that the lowpass for the 24kbps setting was slightly higher than the one for 32kbps, i did find that strange.

New NOKIA N Series support AAC+ and eAAC+.

I know that AAC+ is AAC-HE, but what is eAAC+?
Is there any encoder for eAAC+ available?

The reasons for home users (more music on limited-capacity/bandwidth devices) aren't technologically available yet, and by the time they are, bandwidth (and average storage size) will probably have reached a point where such a minimal bitrate is no longer necessary.

Right now, practically speaking, it'd be useful for large (8CD+) audiobooks, and I regularly see HE-AAC used for supplementary (commentary, alternate language) audio tracks included with DVDRips. Even in that situation, though, it's become less interesting, as people move away from CD-sized files (due to widespread DVD-R adoption). There's also the issue that an hour of audio at 32kbs is only ~15MB, so lower bitrates will result in what is, nowadays, a negligible reduction in filesize (8MB won't really allow for a huge increase in video bitrate).

An increasing number of online radio stations have started offering AAC streams, if 24kbs helps them switch from RealAudio, that'd be a welcome innovation, too.

On the other hand, if better quality at the extreme-lowend leads to quality improvement in mid-range bitrates, that's always good, no?

As I already said, but you apparently didn't bother to read, something being easily ABX'able doesn't mean you can't do a blind test. A result without an actual blind test is worthless, please see TOS8.

I assume they mean HE-AAC with parametric stereo?

I agree with ericw, for portable devices HE-AAC is great.
My new phone (samsung e720) supports it together with MP3 and AAC LC and it's the best choice (quality/file size) for "road usage". Using HE-AAC (@32-40kbps) i can store some hours of music with acceptable quality in the phone memory (that is around 85MB).

I've read somewhere that this codec should be used also for music streaming to mobile phones (i suppose by Vodafone in Europe).

I must check if my phone supports PS, but i dont think so...

Hey u manage to find out what is EAAC+? I am very interested to find out its capability too but still unable to find an encoder for it yet...

You can find a EAAC+ / PS AAC / HE-AAC+PS / aacPlus v2 / AAC++ (all these names are the same) CLI encoder HERE.