IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Suggested for consideration: iTunes Plus vs. neroAacEnc vs. Lame 3.98
M
post Mar 21 2009, 01:24
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 964
Joined: 29-December 01
Member No.: 830



Now that Apple has finally enabled what appears to be Quicktime's highest quality encoding for the iTunes "Plus" preset, would it be worth conducting a listening test to determine the relative standings of the current contenders?

  • iTunes Plus @256kbps
  • iTunes (standard) @256kbps ABR (optional)
  • neroAacEnc @~256kbps VBR
  • neroAacEnc @256kbps CBR (optional)
  • Lame 3.98 @~256kbps VBR
  • Lame 3.98 @256kbps CBR (optional)


- M.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
shakey_snake
post Mar 21 2009, 02:14
Post #2





Group: FB2K Moderator
Posts: 4322
Joined: 1-November 06
From: Cincinnati
Member No.: 37036



QUOTE (M @ Mar 20 2009, 20:24) *
would it be worth conducting a listening test to determine the relative standings of the current contenders?
I think, if previous listening tests are any sort of indication, it's very likely that they're all going to be transparent on non-problem samples.

So then what are you wanting to compare exactly? Average filesize? laugh.gif

This post has been edited by shakey_snake: Mar 21 2009, 02:16


--------------------
elevatorladylevitateme
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kornchild2002
post Mar 21 2009, 06:06
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 2066
Joined: 8-April 05
From: Cincinnati, OH
Member No.: 21277



Go for it if you have the ears. Otherwise you probably aren't going to hear any difference between all three encoders. I would be curious to see how the iTunes Plus setting stacks up to Nero and Lame. I would still never use such a high bitrate setting as Nero produces transparent results at -q0.45--q0.50 for me but that doesn't stop me form being curious.

I think that you might have difficulties matching up the bitrates though. From my experience, the iTunes Plus setting tends to produce files at around 280kbps while -V 0 averages files at about 260kbps. I never tested Nero at -q0.60 but -q0.50 produces file at around 190kbps for me. I don't know if a 20-30kbps difference would drastically affect things but it might be something to think about.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Zarggg
post Mar 21 2009, 16:31
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 545
Joined: 18-January 04
From: bethlehem.pa.us
Member No.: 11318



Unless one of those encoders are horribly glitched, all my submissions would be 5.0 wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dbAmp
post Mar 21 2009, 20:56
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 107
Joined: 10-October 05
Member No.: 25035



Are we certain that the iTunes Plus setting is using VBR and not VBR_Constrained?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Busemann
post Mar 21 2009, 21:55
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 730
Joined: 5-January 04
Member No.: 10970



QUOTE (dbAmp @ Mar 21 2009, 12:56) *
Are we certain that the iTunes Plus setting is using VBR and not VBR_Constrained?


iTunes Plus is VBR_Constrained @ 256kbps using the highest quality setting of the encoder.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Donunus
post Sep 18 2009, 10:47
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 226
Joined: 8-July 05
Member No.: 23210



QUOTE (Busemann @ Mar 22 2009, 04:55) *
QUOTE (dbAmp @ Mar 21 2009, 12:56) *
Are we certain that the iTunes Plus setting is using VBR and not VBR_Constrained?


iTunes Plus is VBR_Constrained @ 256kbps using the highest quality setting of the encoder.


Sorry for the ignorance... constrained meaning 256 minimum or 256 max?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ShowsOn
post Sep 18 2009, 12:51
Post #8





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 369
Joined: 28-June 02
From: South Australia, AUSTRALIA
Member No.: 2421



Well I wouldn't be able to participate in such a test because all these settings will be transparent for me.

I wouldn't mind a new 128 Kbps test featuring LAME 3.98.2, the latest Nero AAC encoder and the new CoreAudio AAC encoder in OSX 10.6.

This post has been edited by ShowsOn: Sep 18 2009, 12:52


--------------------
www.petitiononline.com/RHCPWBCD/petition.html
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd July 2014 - 15:24