Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff (Read 7647 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Hi, folks
I do converting from FLAC to AAC

with foobar and AAC (Nero), VBR, Q0.70:


Same file from FLAC to WAV (with foobar) to AAC (with iTunes not the latest version) with "iTunes Plus" preset:


and even 192kbps preset:


As seen even 192kbps looks better (while file size relatively smaller!)
Why it so?

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Reply #1 –
What do you mean, looks better? It goes higher regarding frequency range?
As for why, they are different encoders and they have different internal settings to achieve given quality/bitrate setting.

Do they sound different, well, at bitrates this high, I seriously doubt it. They ARE different, without doubt, but they are, with 99,999% probability, sounding transparent.
Error 404; signature server not available.

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Reply #2 –
Quote
Your eyes cannot hear.

Especially at such high frequencies…

What matters is whether the files still sound the same while saving space. Encoders deliberately cut high frequencies in order to allocate more bits to lower, more audibly relevant frequencies, thus increasing the probability of transparency. Under lossy encoding, by definition, transparency is all that matters in the end.

Doing some double-blind tests will either put your mind to rest and reveal that both encoders are audibly identical, or reveal that you have acute hearing for high frequencies and suggest a course of action. I doubt there’s much to discuss until then, at least in terms of things that haven’t been explained many times in documentation and previous threads.

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Reply #3 –
Thank to everyone for replies.
Of cause I agree about we aren't hearing with eyes but with ears.
And again you are right about doing blind sound test doubtfully many people will identify difference between 3 of them.

Regarding of what I know about spectral:
lower cutoff = worse sound quality
speaking in primitive manner.

In both iTunes made files cutoff looks more "smooth" somehow.
I'm not about which is better (if you ask me I prefer iTunes's job)
I was about but the appearance.
Before I was sure about such a sharp and flat freq cutoff means coding was made with CBR while ragged edge is equal to VBR.

As for file sizes:
NERO - 5,711 KB
iTunes Plus - 5,883 KB
iTunes VBR192 - 4,435 KB

seen screenshots and knowing filesize which one of NERO & iTunes192 do you choose?

What is really bother me:
Is it possible to do iTunes like in foobar? (cause it is a lot of actions to convert to WAV, then to AAC, and after that also copy tags! ; )

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Reply #4 –
Quote from: k33 on
Regarding of what I know about spectral:
lower cutoff = worse sound quality


This is not a good assumption.  The spectrogram is basically useless here, you waste your time even looking at it.

Quote from: k33 on
seen screenshots and knowing filesize which one of NERO & iTunes192 do you choose?


Whichever one sounds better, if any.  Probably though all are equally good unless this is very hard to encode music.

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Reply #5 –
Or just do
http://www.audiocheck.net/audiotests_frequencycheckhigh.php

using a decent sound card, drivers and headphones. Any of those things can degrade the sound so you don't hear upper frequencies despite being physically capable of hearing them. Or there could be resampling artifacts, making you think you can hear higher than you actually can.

The above is meant to test your absolute limit of hearing (makes no sense to encode frequencies above it for personal use). The fact that you can hear up to a certain frequency on a sweep (pure tone) does not automatically mean you can hear a difference between a 20kHz and a 18kHz cut-off applied to a music clip (what you see in your pictures).

E.g. I can hear up to 18kHz yet it's damn hard for me to tell a whether a 16kHz cut-off has been applied to a music sample or not. I tend to use encoders/settings preserving up to 19-20kHz, for the peace of mind and because it means no trade-off for me (I can fit all my favorite music into my player at those settings).

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Reply #6 –
Why do I have a strong feeling everyone trying to "protect" NERO coder?
I'm not tend to doubt it is good.

This situation reminds me an old anecdote about Freudian slip:
When old couple having breakfast and wife asks "Honey, give me salt please"
"You b*tch ruined whole my life!" he replied.

I was wondering "Why" and "How" )))
with "Why" I see this is the option as answer:
Quote from: hlloyge on
They ARE different, without doubt, but they are, with 99,999% probability, sounding transparent.

As for "How":
How is it possible to do encoding using iTunes in foobar?
I'm afraid "No way"? Isn't it?

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Reply #7 –
Quote from: Martel on
E.g. I can hear up to 18kHz yet it's damn hard for me to tell a whether a 16kHz cut-off has been applied to a music sample or not. I tend to use encoders/settings preserving up to 19-20kHz, for the peace of mind and because it means no trade-off for me (I can fit all my favorite music into my player at those settings).

And still your signature says something about FLAC ; )))
Thanks for link - its quit interesting, my result : I hear sound from 17 and I don't pretend I can do more just wonder.

PS By the way all this is also about coding lossless to lossy for walkman )))

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Reply #8 –
Quote from: k33 on
Regarding of what I know about spectral:
lower cutoff = worse sound quality
speaking in primitive manner.
This is a very crude approximation. Beyond any threshold of audibility, ‘more’ ‘quality’ does not matter. Also, preserving high frequencies for misguided reasons can lead to them being encoded badly and/or stealing bits from lower frequencies and making the latter sound worse also.

Quote
In both iTunes made files cutoff looks more "smooth" somehow.
“somehow”? Before making such a fuss about filters, you might want to learn some more basic details about them. A filter has a slope, how rapidly it attenuates beyond the cut-off (usually = –3 dB) point: 6 dB, 12 dB, 18 dB, 24 dB, more… In some cases, steeper (‘brick wall’) slopes can come with negative effects, which again you can read about. But not necessarily. And it doesn’t matter much at such high frequencies anyway – again.

Quote
seen screenshots and knowing filesize which one of NERO & iTunes192 do you choose?
Neither are relevant to sound quality.

Quote
Is it possible to do iTunes like in foobar? (cause it is a lot of actions to convert to WAV, then to AAC, and after that also copy tags! ; )
Have you searched? Free hint: I seem to recall something called iTunesEncode…

Quote from: k33 on
Why do I have a strong feeling everyone trying to "protect" NERO coder?
We’re trying to protect TOS #8, which you might want to re-read, and the entire purpose of lossy encoding, which is to do whatever it can to the signal that will make it smaller while sounding perceptually identical (or, at lower bitrates, inoffensive).

Quote from: k33 on
Quote from: Martel on
E.g. I can hear up to 18kHz yet it's damn hard for me to tell a whether a 16kHz cut-off has been applied to a music sample or not. I tend to use encoders/settings preserving up to 19-20kHz, for the peace of mind and because it means no trade-off for me (I can fit all my favorite music into my player at those settings).
And still your signature says something about FLAC ; )))
So, people who are interested in lossy encoding for some situations are not allowed to be interested in lossless encoding for other situations and/or archival?

Quote
Thanks for link - its quit interesting, my result : I hear sound from 17 and I don't pretend I can do more just wonder.
Wonder what? How do either of the above cut-off frequencies still matter?

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Reply #9 –
Thanks I have got answers.
Sorry if I said something wrong or didn't search well
thanks for hints especially for free one )))

PS haven't meant nothing offensive and didn't going to break any TOS8 statements, maybe I wasn't ask proper: I didn't try justify what sounds better and didn't said one's better for me (subjectively),
I just have noticed visual difference and asked about why it so. Is it allowed?
I'm not a holy war troll, I prefer common sense then blind perfectionism same as you...

AAC Nero w/ Foobar cutoff

Reply #10 –
Basically the spectrograms are worthless, hence people suggest you not be fooled by them.