I'm wondering if it's safe to do another encode on my music collection. I know that development on the Nero AAC codec is still going on, but I'm wondering how far along it is. I'd hate to take the incredible amount of time it takes to encode all my songs, only to have a new version of the encoder available a few weeks later.

Now obviously I don't expect a date or anything... in fact, I don't even really expect a ballpark-estimate. I'm just wondering if it's in the forseeable future.

Also, menno mentioned that it should be rather easy to create an OS X version of the encoder, if only they (he) were able to get a Mac to develop on. How's that going?

I am not sure how Mac OS X development is going but I can comment on a ballpark estimate when a updated encoder will come out. We should be seeing a updated Nero AAC encoder either by the end of this month or maybe the end of next month. I was told it would take about 1-2 months and that was in the beginning of April.

Hmm... hope it's in time for me to do a full re-encode by the end of June.

If not you could always push it back a little. The newer Nero AAC encoder is supposed to solve many compatibility issues as well as add some quality tweaks.

Actually, it's already out and integrated into the newest Nero paid products, which is quite interesting considering that there's (still) no word the [free] CLI update... Any news, Garf et. al.?

That is interesting. Theoretically then you can already use it if you have the latest version of the Nero software bundle.

I guess the stand-alone free version will come out shortly then.

Please take into account this specific list of changes for version in Nero bundle:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st&p=553898

Nothing has changed considering quality for stereo files since latest CLI version.

Has this problem been fixed? That would be a quality change in stereo files.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st&p=516451
Since then, I went lossless, when going lossy I trusted lame mp3 at high bitrates more. I use aac only for very low bitrates.

And these are your mistakes.

Same here! The forum reminds me of mpc. i also think about encoding to AAc but there are downsides. Nero aac is not as actively developed as mp3. AND many many many inhouse audio players (dvd players, or however they are called today) DO NOT play AAC audio files but mp3 and wma sometimes.
So will the format die?

I was searching for a good overall codec which is also good at low bitrats. I don't think Vorbis will win on non geek devices, so there is only AAC...

But also seems on a dead end like vorbis or mpc.

Why don't so many home audio players (almost any) play aac?

AAC is not vorbis...for one, it has portable support in the ipod.

You guys are too quick to declare something dead. I'd take MPC over AAC. I don't need 80k , mpc is good at 128 k and excellent at 170~200 range. There plenty of linux options and some hardware players as well. AAC without ipod / itunes would have less support than MPC / Vorbis. Am I missing something? I Can't remember the last time I saw any AAC hifi / dap outside ipods . In linux heavy patents keep it out of most distros and repos, In contrast Vorbis, Flac, Wavpack and MPC are supported in most players / rippers out of the box.

Nero AAC Codec is not standard & I don't use it for archiving.
Vorbis/MPC are dead, because of lack of hardware support.
Vorbis is great for game developing.

AAC Cons:
Lack of AAC support in any DVD Players/Home Audio Systems.(WMA 10 Pro too)
Most car audio systems doesnt support AAC.(WMA 10 Pro too)


Any format without hardware support are dead, like Vorbis, MPC, WMA 10 Pro.

Thats horrible, I can only play AAC files in some DAPs & modern Cell/PDA phones.

I don't have any other choice, only WAV & MP3.

Not standard? What is this standard you're talking about?


Utter rubbish. Most Kenwood, Sony and Pioneer car audio systems support AAC. Regarding DVD Players/Home audio Systems, the PlayStation3, Wii and Xbox 360 all support AAC. I know FAR more people who use these devices as for home audio than some obscure system. Also there's Slingbox.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Audio_Coding#Hardware

Nero is not standard, because:
Doesnt encode accurate in CBR mode.
The latest version quality is not good.

Hahahahaha...
Go & visit Sony, Kenwood & Pioneer sites.
How many head units supports AAC?
Sony, Kenwood & Pioneer?
That's all Car Audio brands you can say?
Thats horrible funny: Regarding DVD Players/Home audio Systems, the PlayStation3, Wii and Xbox 360 all support AAC: these are gaming cosoles, not BD Players.
People don't buy PS3 for watching BD Movies & listening to AAC files.
They will convert any audio files to MP3 & wait for next gen of BD Players.
MP3 is supported in all stuff.

Umm... The latest version of Nero AAC is supposed to provide better (if not the same) quality as the previous build when using non-classical music. Do you have ABX test results? I also don't see how Nero's AAC encoder isn't standard just because it doesn't produce good quality (or so you say). I guess we would need your definitely of what standard is. There isn't a single "standard" AAC encoder on the market that is used by every application. There isn't a single "standard" mp3 encoder either. So what do you mean? There are more car audio brands that support AAC as well. I went to Best Buy and out of the 21 that they had, 17 or so supported AAC audio files. I don't remember the exact number but I wrote it down in my PDA. I made another post where I stated the exact numbers.



Actually, 80% of PS3 owners use the console for Blu-ray playback. On top of that, employees of electronics stores will push the PS3 over other stand-alone Blu-ray player models. They also keep PS3's stocked in the home theater department as well as the gaming department of many Best Buys (every Best Buy that I have visited does this). Not only that but there are many, many, many people who use their consoles for playing back media. Visit either the PS3 or Xbox 360 forums and you will see just how many people use their consoles for media playback. I myself use my Xbox 360 all the time for this as my consoles are in the living room while my computers are in the office. I can wirelessly stream music to both consoles or just hook up my iPod/Zune directly into the Xbox 360. It comes in handy whenever I am entertaining guests or just feel like playing some music through my theater system.



That is incorrect. Microsoft's Zune (all of them), Creative Zen (all of the newer Zen's), many SanDisk Sansa players, Sony's new Walkman players, and many others support the playback of AAC audio files. AAC definitely has more support than MPC and Vorbis put together (this is not including Rockbox, only official firmware). The iPod line just happen to be the most popular players that support AAC but there are many, many others that support it as well.

What do you thing is better:
Winamp's AAC Encoder or Nero AAC?
What about Alpine & Clarion?
http://www.alpine-usa.com/US-en/products/p...ng=en&tab=F
What about old Car Audio Systems?
Thats stupid, PS3/XBox 360 optimized for gaming, not for a high-end BD Player.
JUST IMAGINE, USING PS3 GAMEPAD INSTEAD OF REMOTE CONTROL.☺☻☺

The PS3 is a really good BD player, probably one of the best and with software updates it supports the BD 2.0 Profile. If you don't want to use the controller for movie playback Sony makes a remote control specifically for movie playback on the PS3. (I know this is off topic)

For now, its good, but for future, it's not.
I will buy a nex-gen Philips BD Players instead of this game box for using in home.
Nex-gen of BD players supports software updates.
I'm watching BD movies in my PC.
With this monster high-end sound card:
Auzentech X-Fi Prelude 7.1


Could you compare this sound card with PS3 audio chipset?

Fair enough. One advantage to waiting is that prices will continue to come down.

From my own ABX tests, I found that WinAmp's AAC encoder was on par with the iTunes AAC encoder at the 128kbps bitrate. I found that Nero AAC had a slight advantage over both. As for the car CD decks, I didn't look at the brands. I just looked at whether or not they played AAC files. Sony and Kenwood are the two major brands sold at commercial stores such as Best Buy. Most of their units play AAC files just fine. I guess I don't see the point in arguing against gaming consoles as multimedia devices whenever they are used as such. The PS3 is one of the best (if not the best due to future compatibility) Blu-ray players out there. Its video quality was tested to be better than some of those $1500 players and its firmware is constantly being upgraded.



Not to delve too far off topic but the PS3 is currently the only Blu-ray player on the market that supports profile 1.1 and has the ability to be upgraded to support profile 2.0. It is also the only player to have the essential hardware for profile 2.0 support. So the PS3 is currently the best player now and for the future. Not only that but the PS3 is only $399 where most stand-alone players are in the $500+ range. So yes, the PS3 is currently the best Blu-ray player on the market and will be for some time. I also use my PS3 remote to control movie playback all the time.

Yes...
You're right about PS3, because of it GPU: nVIDIA RSX:

Specifications

• 550 MHz G71 based GPU on 90 nm process [1]
  • 300+ million transistors (600 million with Cell CPU) [2]
  • Multi-way programmable parallel floating-point shader pipelines[3]
    • Independent pixel/vertex shader architecture
    • 24 parallel pixel-shader ALU westly pipes
      • 5 ALU operations per pipeline, per cycle (2 vector4 or 2 scalar/dual/co-issue and fog ALU)
      • 27 FLOPS per pipeline, per cycle
    • 8 parallel vertex pipelines
      • 2 ALU operations per pipeline, per cycle (1 vector4 and 1 scalar, dual issue)
      • 10 FLOPS per pipeline, per cycle
    • Maximum vertex count: 1.1 billion vertices per second
      • polygon count: 250 million polygons per second
    • Maximum shader operations: 100 billion shader operations per second
    • Floating Point Operations per Second: 364 Gigaflops per Second ((27*24+8*10)*500)
  • 24 texture filtering units (TF) and 8 vertex texture addressing units (TA)
    • 24 filtered samples per clock
      • Maximum texel fillrate: 12.0 GigaTexels per second (24 textures * 500 MHz)
    • 32 unfiltered texture samples per clock, ( 8 TA x 4 texture samples )
  • 8 Render Output units / pixel rendering pipelines
    • Peak pixel fillrate (theoretical): 4.4 Gigapixel per second
    • Maximum Z sample rate: 8.0 GigaSamples per second (2 Z-samples * 8 ROPs * 500 MHz)
    • Maximum anti-aliasing sample rate: 8.0 GigaSamples per second (2 AA samples * 8 ROPs * 500 MHz)
  • Maximum Dot product operations: 51 billion per second [4]
  • 128-bit pixel precision offers rendering of scenes with high dynamic range rendering (HDR)
  • 256 MB GDDR3 RAM at 650 MHz[5] [6]
    • 128-bit memory bus width
    • 22.4 GB/s read and write bandwidth
  • Cell FlexIO bus interface
    • 20 GB/s read to the Cell and XDR memory
    • 15 GB/s write to the Cell and XDR memory
  • Support for OpenGL ES 2.0
  • Support for S3TC texture compression [1]

But it's funny: The Best BD Player is a Gaming Console.

I think Nero AAC is not standard becuase: when you using CBR mode for converting to AAC, Nero doesnt accurately do that.
For example: -cbr 128000 -lc & the result is: 129KB CBR.

Really? In my own tests, it's been pretty consistently 3 kbps higher than expected; i.e., you use -cbr 125000 to get 128 kbps, because -cbr 128000 gives you 131 kbps. Are you consistently getting 129, instead? If so, it's a curious discrepancy.

- M.

Here is the test resualt:
-cbr 128000 -lc

Using Media Info Lite:
General
Complete name : C:\Documents and Settings\***\My Documents\Tekken 3.m4a
Format : MPEG-4
Format profile : Base Media / Version 2
Codec ID : mp42
File size : 2.46 MiB
Duration : 2mn 37s
Overal bit rate : 131 Kbps
Encoded date : UTC 2008-06-06 23:14:58
Tagged date : UTC 2008-06-06 23:15:08
Writing application : Nero AAC codec / Aug 6 2007

Audio
Format : AAC
Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
Format version : Version 4
Format profile : LC
Format settings, SBR : No
Duration : 2mn 37s
Bit rate mode : VBR
Bit rate : 130 Kbps
Maximum bit rate : 143 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions : L R
Sampling rate : 44.1 KHz
Resolution : 16 bits
Stream size : 2.43 MiB
Encoded date : UTC 2008-06-06 23:14:58
Tagged date : UTC 2008-06-06 23:15:08

Chapters
1 : 00:00:00.059 -


Using Winamp's CT AAC+:
General
Complete name : C:\Documents and Settings\***\My Documents\Tekken 3.m4a
Format : MPEG-4
Format profile : Base Media / Version 2
Codec ID : mp42
File size : 2.43 MiB
Duration : 2mn 37s
Overal bit rate : 130 Kbps
Encoded date : UTC 2008-06-06 23:31:37
Tagged date : UTC 2008-06-06 23:31:43

Audio
Format : AAC
Format/Info : Advanced Audio Codec
Format version : Version 4
Format profile : LC
Format settings, SBR : No
Codec ID : 40
Duration : 2mn 37s
Bit rate mode : Variable
Bit rate : 128 Kbps
Maximum bit rate : 135 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions : L R
Sampling rate : 44.1 KHz
Resolution : 16 bits
Stream size : 2.40 MiB
Encoded date : UTC 2008-06-06 23:31:37
Tagged date : UTC 2008-06-06 23:31:43

VBR?
Why?

I get your point and have been against the whole PS3 marketing campaign from its second re-invention. In the beginning, the PS3 was advertised as a gaming console with Blu-ray capabilities. The gaming library for the PS3 was ho hum (as it should have been, all console launches are like that) so Sony changed the marketing strategy behind the PS3 to show it as a Blu-ray player with gaming capabilities. I get your point as some people just don't want to purchase a gaming console to use as a Blu-ray player.

Just out of curiosity, why would you ever want to encode CBR AAC files? I understand wanting a bitrate limitation for internet radio broadcasts but a difference between 128kbps and 130kbps isn't going to make a difference. Using CBR (especially for Nero's AAC encoder) really hinders its performance when compared to using its VBR presets (just like Lame mp3)

Yeah, thank you, me too.
People buy PS3 for using it as BD Player & they never use it for gaming.
AAC really doesn't support CBR?
When I converting files in VBR mode, I hearing the hissy sound.
I remember when I played Doom 3.
The audio format used in Doom 3 is Vorbis.
Always cancer hissy sound is Doom 3.
Also, Resident Evil 4 (PC) too.
I always hears hissy sound when I convert any files with VBR mode, specially in Vorbis & MP3.
With poor quality sound cards, you can hear more hiss.

Most of the sound files on Doom 3 was encoded in Vorbis at 56kbps and it does sound bad, and it was a shame that Trent Reznor quit doing the sound effects for this game. This game could have had a awesome soundtrack like Quake. But instead, Doom 3 has a pistol thats sounds like stapler and Imps that make car skidding noises .

Also i have encountered a similar problem with GTA 4 on XBox 360. The audio on the radio stations sound really compressed to hell like if was encoded at 56kbps. I could hear some artifacts on some of the music on my cheap HD LCD TV.

Its a shame that the Cell CPU is sorta bottlenecking the nVIDIA RSX GPU, with its memory controller that programmers have to work with. Which makes it end up like the Sega Saturn.

Also RE 4 for the PC, was a yet another awfull console to PC port.

Not to go too, too far off topic but the GPU is bottlenecking the CPU. The PS3 gets most of its power from its cell processor where as the Xbox 360 gets most of its power from the GPU. That is why both consoles can produce the same (or nearly the same) results and will probably always produce around the same results. The Nvidia GPU used in the PS3 is extremely dated (it was derived from the 6800/6900 line). In fact, it was already outdated the second the console launched.

Edit: As to the hissing, that has nothing to do with AAC VBR. That has to do with either the source audio or the VBR setting that you are choosing. Remember that a 128kbps CBR file would correspond to a 128kbps VBR file. A hiss that can be heard at 128kbps CBR can probably still be heard at 128kbps VBR (or vice versa).

Sorry, but I never use VBR mode for archiving.
Vorbis quality in 56KB is horrible.
AAC is a VBR format like Vorbis & MPC?
I prefer Lossy WavPack instead of all VBR formats.

That's OK , I don't doubt that 56 k isn't great. But be prepared to backup your VBR views with some objective data here. AAC is VBR - at least with Nero.

Winamp's CT AAC+ too.

If you come to a specialized audio forum, and ask for questions, I expect that you take advise.

First, leave out your years-old ideas that VBR = bad and CBR = best. This is plainly wrong nowadays (and has been for the past years).
VBR lets a codec adapt to the changes throughout the audio, spending more bits where the complexity is high.
Properly tuned encoders can make good judgements on the complexity, and adapt correctly over the restictions the format imposes.

Next, specifically about AAC, the format is VBR. The CBR mode is an ABR mode that works on a small window. (See http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=ABR for extensive info on ABR).

The fact that Nero produces a file slightly bigger than that of Winamp is just annectodal, and has to do with the way Nero has been tuned. Probably could be fixed, and definitely you can change the parameters of the commandline to make it output the bitrate you want.

At last, VBR does not produce hiss, and definitely hiss is not an artifact of lossy encoders (lossyWav/wavPack aside). That hiss either is not hiss (and you meant ringing, flanging, warbling, ....) or the hiss was in the original file.

Nothing wrong in you preffering hybrid lossless to plain lossy. But at least, that your reasoning not be something you've imagined.

Sorry to be off topic again, I agree that the PS3 GPU become outdated when it was released. Just like the same bleak fate that the PS2 had when it was just released, such as no pixel pipelines and shaders, that made id Software's programmer John Carmack comment at it for being out of date on its first year. Also the RSX is based on the GeForce 7800, with a 128bit memory bus instead of 256. Just like the nVidia's GeForce 8600, the major bottleneck on the RSX is the memory bus.

Am just wondering, if there is incorrect track lengh time on those AAC files, and might have coursed the hissing. Since older versions of Nero AAC, such as Feb 07 build, has a bug that writes the incorrect track time. It can be fixed by using MP4Box to reformat the MP4 container or use the latest version of Nero AAC.

I have many original audio CDs.
I never buy a digital song, only audio CDs.
Vorbis produce significant noise/hiss in Post-Grunge/Heavy Metal songs.(specially below 128K)
LAME produce less noise/hiss in VBR too.

Its a known issue with vorbis esp with older versions. lame can also do at lower vbr setting but ringing / pre echo are its trademark.

CPKTV, this noise isn't problem of a VBR mode. This is the problem of unsuitable codec or too low bitrate.

Low bitrates yes, but:
LAME 3.97 is unstable?

This is beginning to sound a lot like the banned user Sina.

I think you might be right. Although this one seems to be lacking insults or cursing.



Dammit, I don't know why I said 6800. I have the documentation right in front of me. I guess I was thinking about my notebook's GPU when I was posting this. But yeah, the PS3's GPU is based off of the 7800 line. The GPU in the PS3 is still its limiting factor (aside from the major design flaw of the cell having one processor to control all the cells, it should have had at least a dual-core chip for that). It is a shame that Sony would have a new processor and yet not take the same route that Microsoft did for their GPU. Eh, that is a different discussion for a different set of forums.

Nope.

They have the same birthday and their IP addresses come from the same corner of the globe.

Yes, car audio devices support it quite well. But:
Almost ANY multimedia devices of big companies which we typically use for video as well as audio playback, do NOT support AAC. I'm talking about devices like Philips DVP 5980. This is why unfortunately I have to use mp3.

I guess that all depends on what you definition of multimedia devices from big companies is. The iPod is the biggest multimedia device ever released and it supports AAC playback. The Xbox 360 and PS3 (games are media too) are two huge media devices from really big companies that support AAC playback as well. If you are talking about $20 DVD players down at Wal-Mart then yes, I would agree with you as AAC support is lacking. However, Blu-ray players from Sony support the AAC format and many other home theater all-in-one box systems support iPods and the AAC format. So AAC support is growing with every generation of hardware and it will only be a matter of time until it is near that of mp3 support. Also, many cellphones support the playback of AAC audio files from big manufacturers such as Sony, Motorola, and LG.

I also don't think it is unfortunate that you have to use mp3 as I find the Lame mp3 encoder to be top notch.

Yes, I'm talking about DVD players, simply DVD players, but I disagree here: It's the cheap players which sometimes support aac (xoro afaik). All the big companies players (Philips, Sony, Pioneer, Kenwood, ...) don't.
What aac capable DVD-Player would you recommend for me?

Well, my roommate has an LG model that upscales DVDs to 1080i and has a direct USB support for iPods. It can play AAC files off of iPods, USB thumb drives, data CDs, or data DVDs. I don't even know if they make that model anymore but it came in an all-in-one home theater in a box system. Ah wait, here is the newer model that is a stand-alone DVD player for $80 and it upconverts DVDs to 1080p. It supports standard mpeg-4 videos, mpeg-4 AVC videos, and mpeg-4 AAC audio files. There is also a Panasonic model (the DVD-S54K) that supports AAC files as well for $90. So AAC support is gaining with popular manufacturers and Sony has already implemented it in their Blu-ray players.

This isn't available in Europe afaics. And the german LG website has this one as their current dvd player, but it does not support AAC.
Well and Panasonic.de does not give me an S54k, but S54 and I don't find AAC audio mentioned there.
I'm still under the impression that AAC support on DVD/Home theater players is almost non existant

I couldn't find any mention of AAC audio or AVC video in the specs for any of the LG players I've seen. Do you have a link that covers these more thoroughly, or are you simply describing what you've seen your roommate's device play? (Edit: Yes, I've already checked the link in your original post....)

If there really is a DVD (or Blu-ray) player on the market that supports AAC in an *.m4a container, and AVC in an *.m4v container - so that my wife and I could use anything I've encoded for her iPhone, or for FrontRow on her Mac - it would be a most welcome revelation!

- M.

Well, you asked for a player and didn't specify a region. You might be right about European availability of DVD players or home theater systems that don't support AAC but you are wrong about U.S. availability. AAC is gaining popularity (mainly due to the iPod) and there are a handful of products that support AAC digital audio files over here in the U.S.



I am just going off of personal experience as Best Buy and LG simply mention mpeg-4 support, they don't give any specifics. My roommate has been able to plug their iPod in and play AAC music, video podcasts (in the mpeg-4 AVC format), and some iTunes Plus music videos (also in the mpeg-4 AVC format). I know that Sony's Blu-ray player (their $399 model) supports mpeg-4 AAC audio though as someone on the PS3 forums purchased it, tried it out, and compared it against the PS3. I have seen their LG unit work in person though and can vouch for it. I haven't seen the LG unit I linked in person but it was the older model. I tried looking it up on the internet and, as I suspected, LG moved onto a couple newer models. Still, I don't know why LG would include such a nice feature in an older home theater system and not include it in a newer one.

It does, it's just that you don't understand how CBR is defined by the AAC standard. CBR within AAC is defined using buffer that should not overflow or underflow, but does not mean that every frame should be of identical size. (in the same way as CBR is defined for MPEG2/4 video)

So how is dev coming along anyway?