New streaming Software in mp3pro is Available at
http://www.audiorealm.com New SAM with mp3pro encoding and Shoutcast mp3pro Plugin.

Listen new mp3pro Shoutcast streams at:

http://www.shoutcast.com/directory/?s=mp3p...ro&numresult=25


Live365 will Supoport mp3pro soon! Prefered Members will be available to listen mp3pro Streams downloading a small Plugin for Live365 player.

And mp3pro Plugins will be available in some known players soon!


mp3PRO IS ALIVE and will be the Susessor of mp3!


Viva mp3pro!

mp3pro? Why mp3pro, when there're better alternatives?

Are you refering to low birates? Generally, mp3pro outperforms ogg and wma at 32-96 birates. However, some AAC developers have already mentioned in this forum the new AACplus (AAC + SBR) will be a better solution than mp3pro.

mp3pro will never be the sucessor of anything

mp3pro will be the sucessor of mp3
AACplus the Sucessor of AAC

Is very Obvious!

We have plans to begins to Stream at AAcplus in a few months when Software will be available on the market, but at this moment mp3pro is the better Audio Codec for Streaming!

What better alternatives do you have for Streamers like me?
I Wish to stream at 32Kbps in FM Stereo Quality now! (For example same Sound Quality as mp3 at 96Kbps Minimum)

What do you have now?

Is this widely accepted? I've found Ogg to be on par with mp3pro at those bitrates.

32kbps mp3pro, FM quality ? In your dreams, perhaps ! Have you tried listening using good headphones ? When I did, 48kbps mp3pro sounded like crap to me. Smeared sound, collapsed stereo and annoying artifacts all over the place. Is that what we call progress ?

Why not stream at higher bitrates ? Everyone has 128kbps+ connections nowadays.. and at 80-128kbps, you can get very nice quality for the size.

Why pull out a top-notch codec, and then force it to cope with a damn 40-year old phone line in the first place ?

Nothing ATM, but this may change soon. According to the MPEG white paper on AAC-HE (AAC+), "excellent quality stereo" will be attainable at 32kbps, which I would guess will probably be FM-ish quality. I recall that Ahead's AAC+ plugin will be available in June, so be on the lookout for that! MP3Pro might be an o.k. solution for this bitrate, but don't expect true FM quality, as Numlock has also stated. Other codecs also can't do much better at 32kbps: RealAudio8 with ATRAC3 sounds decent, but is near-mono. Vorbis won't consistently get down to 32kbps (stereo) until you use -q -1 --resample 24000, and WMA9 is horriibly annoying in this neigborhood, even at half-sampling rates. If I were you, I would stream in mono if you are that interested in phoneline bitrates, at least until AAC+ becomes popular. That way, you can retain a little more bandwidth, which to me is more palatable than low-bandwidth stereo.

[/QUOTE]
Nothing ATM, but this may change soon. According to the MPEG white paper on AAC-HE (AAC+), "excellent quality stereo" will be attainable at 32kbps, which I would guess will probably be FM-ish quality. I recall that Ahead's AAC+ plugin will be available in June, so be on the lookout for that! MP3Pro might be an o.k. solution for this bitrate, but don't expect true FM quality, as Numlock has also stated. Other codecs also can't do much better at 32kbps: RealAudio8 with ATRAC3 sounds decent, but is near-mono. Vorbis won't consistently get down to 32kbps (stereo) until you use -q -1 --resample 24000, and WMA9 is horriibly annoying in this neigborhood, even at half-sampling rates. If I were you, I would stream in mono if you are that interested in phoneline bitrates, at least until AAC+ becomes popular. That way, you can retain a little more bandwidth, which to me is more palatable than low-bandwidth stereo. [/QUOTE]



That`s Right!

The example was comparing normal mp3 at 96kbps with AACplus at 32Kbps. (as same Quality)

Yes, I am a Dreamer!

While others are planning to stream at mp3pro, I am dreaming to stream at AACplus in a few months!

My Harman Kardon is Conected to my Sound Card and its Sounds Great with a stream of 64kbps mp3pro (AACplus White papers say: it`similar Quality as AACplus at 48Kbps)

AACplus at 32Kbps will be similar quality as mp3pro at 48Kbps in Stereo!
or mp3 at 96Kbps.

With a Stream of 64kbps will be as 192kbps mp3 for Broadband users!

Ripping Directly from an Original Compact Disc to mp3pro at 64Kbps with MusicMatch Sounds Great! or with Nero from a WAV file.
if you was transcoding or Ripping from Pirate CDs the Sound will be distorted! it craps!

Streaming at 128Kbps, the Bandwidth cost is for about 4$ per Listener.
at 64Kbps $2 Dlls. at 32Kbps 1$ each.

Streaming at 64kbps, the Listener needs a Minimum Bandwidth of 128Kbps.
Stream at 128Kbps, a bandwidth of 256 kbps. (In latin America)

AACplus is good - if only people would use it properly (ie: increasing quality instead of lowering bitrate even further).

If you're a Dreamer, then why won't you use AACplus to improve the listeners' experience.


Let's be serious, please.
- ok: AAC+ @ 32kbps similar to mp3pro @ 48kbps
- BUT: mp3pro @ 48 is MUCH worse than mp3 @ 96 (to me)
- AND: fraunhofer mp3 @ 96 (the best) is disturbing, and annoying to listen to (for me).


Pardon me ?
Mp3 can be near-transparent at 192kbps on many materials. What (besides marketing gibberish) makes you believe that AACpro does the same at 64kbps ?


Looks like we don't listen to music on the same equipment. What about you replacing your desktop pc speakers ?


That's very strange - I could not differenciate the following:
- original cd => mp3pro 64kbps
- 192kbps MP3 JS rip => mp3pro 64kbps

I don't think transcoding is much of an problem when dealing with low bitrates.


Uh,oh. I thought this was about bringing better quality to the listener ? I must have been dreaming


Did you know that a few numbers happen to be caught between consecutive powers of two ? Take 64 and 128 for example... in between there's 80. Wouldn't 80kbps be nice for a 128kbps user ?

Maybe he's just deaf.


Maybe he's trying to factor in people who might 40% of their bandwidth free for other things, but I can't really tell.

LOL



Possibly, yes. Fact is, there are (and will be) tools to manage bandwidth, i.e using the available bandwidth and adapting the bitrate to network load (using a few seconds of safe buffering of course).

Beside the costs issues, that would allow to take benefit of the many under-used 256+ kbps network connections

It's hard to tell, since the encoding quality depends on the sample to be encoded. There are samples where mp3pro sounds bad, and others where it is the best. Overall, i think mp3pro is the best for low birates. Check out the following listening tests:

ff123's ogg vs wma vs mp3 vs mp3pro tests
64 kbit/s Group Listening test.

Sorry for my poor English grammar trying to explain the Source encoding to mp3pro.

Numlock have a part of reason! Another One is Because some ISP`s in Mexico for example, they offers a bandwidth of 256K and really is for about 20 to 30% less.

I was telling the explain about the Source to encode as original CDs because In latin America its very easy to find Pirate CDs with the Worst Sound quality!

Great post!
Remember i am Talking about Streaming encoding. Less than 64Kbps!

Eh, all those tests proved to me was that there is no clear winner. On your average sample, mp3pro & ogg are comparable @ ~64kbps.

Explain this to me as if I were 5 years old...

P.S.: and, in the present, I would rather use ogg.

edit: added P.S..

56k here!

If you enjoy listening to music streams, why not upgrade to ADSL or something similar ? There are great offers around here. You'll pay less (if you listen a lot), and enjoy far greater quality.