Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hydrogenaudio AAC Listening Test Results

Posted by timothy on from the picking-and-squeezing dept.

caffeine_monkey writes "Hydrogenaudio's AAC public listening test, previously posted on Slashdot, is now over and the results are in. The test compared five codecs at 128 kbps, including Psytel, Nero, Sorenson Squeeze, QuickTime, and FAAC. The winner? 'QuickTime is a clear winner, performing much better than the competition. Sorenson Squeeze, Psytel AACenc and Nero are tied, with Sorenson slightly higher than the others. Faac is clearly the worst.'"

1 of 306 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Real competition absent by viktor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Actually I do not agree with you at all. Comparing different encoders for a certain format is a complete test. In this particular case, the goal was to find out which AAC encoder is the best. The results answered that question.

    As an Open-Source (and open standards) advocate it is easy to look at such a test and say "but Ogg/MP3/whatever is better anyways, they should have included them". Actually saying so leads nowhere at all.

    If you want a comparison between Ogg, AAC, WMA and MP3, then do such a comparison. But this was not a test to find our which format/algorithm was the best, it was a test to find out which AAC encoder was the best, which is also what the test answered.

    Not every test in the world should always include all and every variant of the test subject in question. Just because you're comparing the quality of carrots from different farmers, you shouldn't automatically be expected to include potatoes in the comparison just because there are people that prefer potatoes over carrots. If the test question was "which is the best vegetable", then omitting potatoes could be considered careless.

    And, in very much the same way, if the test question is "which is the best AAC encoder", including MP3-or Ogg-encoders would be just as wrong.

    That's my view, at least.

    /Viktor...