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.'"

2 of 306 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Microsoft by jkrise · · Score: 0, Troll

    why wasn't WMA v8/v9 included in the test?

    Slashdot's agreement with MS precludes them from publishing Benchmarks and performance figures for their products, I guess ;-D.

    Secondly, does anyone at /. use WMA at all?

    -

    --
    If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
  2. Re:Why do I care? by 73939133 · · Score: 0, Troll

    It converts to AIFF just fine with no loss of quality.

    But most people need to keep their files in compressed form, and if you get stuff in AAC and transcode it to something else at the same bitrate, you will usually lose quality relative to having encoded the audio in the other format in the first place.

    The point is: there is no point to AAC for users; there are better, open standards out there. Whether one AAC codec is better or worse than another just doesn't make any difference: don't use any of them.