Slashdot Mirror

These guys look like they have a simpler setup. http://www.soundexpert.info/index.htm

Download the file, compare the sample to the control, and fill out a little survey on how degraded the sample sounds.

Rinse and repeat.

soundexpert.info seems to do what you suggest. Multiple bitrates, other formats, blind test, AND they do higher and lower bitrates.

http://www.soundexpert.info/coders128.jsp

The instructions seem fairly simple as well. Download the test file, listen to the samples, and fill out a short questionnaire.

http://www.soundexpert.info/testroom.htm

soundexpert.info seems to do what you suggest. Multiple bitrates, other formats, blind test, AND they do higher and lower bitrates.

http://www.soundexpert.info/coders128.jsp

The instructions seem fairly simple as well. Download the test file, listen to the samples, and fill out a short questionnaire.

http://www.soundexpert.info/testroom.htm

AAC encoding is actually noticeably better than LAME at lower bitrates (128 kbps and below). so you can actually compress a track more with AAC and produce the same quality audio as a higher bitrate MP3.

most sources seem to agree that MPC and AAC are at the head of the pack amongst modern audio codecs. MPC being an open source codec would be preferable over AAC, but AAC obviously has much wider acceptance while MPC is supported by very few hardware manufacturers.

AAC is undoubtedly better at low bitrates (e.g. 128 kb/s CBR). But since the advent of LAME 3.97, a lot of listening tests (probably at least half) have been ranking LAME 3.97 MP3s ahead of AACs, at sensible bitrates that is (192 kb/s VBR or better).

Of course that depends on the quality of the AAC encoder too. Just as examples, this test from 2005 ranks an alpha version of LAME 3.97 ahead of Nero AAC, while this one from 2006 ranks Nero AAC ahead of LAME, though LAME is still ahead of iTunes AAC (also it is claimed there that any score above 5 indicates imperfections only "beyond the threshold of human perception").

DRM-free music is great, but is the audio codec used also unencumbered by licenses and patents?

If you're moving from MP3 to AAC, you may as well move to FLAC (or Ogg Vorbis which is superior to AAC, MP3 and WMA). Both FLAC and Vorbis are patent and license free codecs. Software developers technically can't implement MP3 and AAC without paying royalties to the patent holders on those codecs. Don't support those formats, they're not free.

I prefer AAC, really. It consistently beats MP3, and sometimes wins over ogg and sometimes loses in listening tests. And it's supported on the Zune! Hurray! In fact, most new devices coming out, no matter who makes them, support AAC now. It's proprietary, yes, but so is MP3.

I prefer AAC, really. It consistently beats MP3, and sometimes wins over ogg and sometimes loses in listening tests. And it's supported on the Zune! Hurray! In fact, most new devices coming out, no matter who makes them, support AAC now. It's proprietary, yes, but so is MP3.