AAC really that good?
I was really excited when I was told that AAC is a much more advanced format which takes up less space for the quality of encoding. I did some encoding and I'm not sure if it's really as god as it is hyped to be:
Encoding at 128kbps, the music souunds somehow richer but at the cost of certain modifications to the music.
This is most noticeable in chlassical music endcodings. For example, piano music. The notes just sound too much on the crisp side, as if the muusic was resonating from a tin foil.
So I'd say 128 AAC sounds similar to 160 Mp3 rather than rivaling cd quality as Jobs puts it.
What do you all think? Any sound experts? I used to encode mp3 at variable bit rate a 224 kbps. what would be the AAC equivalent?
Steve.
Encoding at 128kbps, the music souunds somehow richer but at the cost of certain modifications to the music.
This is most noticeable in chlassical music endcodings. For example, piano music. The notes just sound too much on the crisp side, as if the muusic was resonating from a tin foil.
So I'd say 128 AAC sounds similar to 160 Mp3 rather than rivaling cd quality as Jobs puts it.
What do you all think? Any sound experts? I used to encode mp3 at variable bit rate a 224 kbps. what would be the AAC equivalent?
Steve.
Comments
Then there's the encoder Apple's using for their store, which is probably not QuickTime.