IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
What about MP3pro!?
pixolex
post Jan 15 2003, 10:41
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 14-January 03
Member No.: 4573



There are quality in MP3pro?!
Yes i now it's not free...but...it will replace MP3 in a near future?
rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Atlantis
post Jan 15 2003, 10:49
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 250
Joined: 27-December 02
From: ROMA, Italy
Member No.: 4269



QUOTE (pixolex @ Jan 15 2003 - 10:41 AM)
It will replace MP3 in a near future?

I don't think so.
mp3pro is decent on low bitrates, but oggvorbis imo is better.
At medium bitrates acc, lame mp3 & vorbis are still better.
At high bitrates, mpc is the king.

The only way i would use mp3pro is on a portable player when going to work (listening to music and don't caring for quality)

bye smile.gif


--------------------
Vital papers will demonstrate their vitality by spontaneously moving from where you left them to where you can't find them.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kotrtim
post Jan 15 2003, 12:32
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 657
Joined: 4-December 02
Member No.: 3989



QUOTE (pixolex @ Jan 15 2003 - 01:41 AM)
but...it will replace MP3 in a near future?

No never with it's max. bitrate at 160 kbit/s, and it's bad at high bitrate!
Maybe it will replace MP3 in term of streaming
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
jesseg
post Jan 15 2003, 12:47
Post #4





Group: Banned
Posts: 218
Joined: 22-December 02
Member No.: 4194



mabey something else will replace mp3 as the standard for streaming....

in fact, i can hardly sleep sometimes if i'm thinking about Shoutcast3 right before i goto bed. I sooooooooo wish I could tell you all about it, but Tom said I cant tell anyone yet. huh.gif

oh well... I can soon - sometime this spring. biggrin.gif I cant wait!!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
hans-jürgen
post Jan 16 2003, 08:31
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 573
Joined: 2-August 02
From: Hamburg, Germany
Member No.: 2898



QUOTE (pixolex @ Jan 15 2003 - 10:41 AM)
There are quality in MP3pro?!
Yes i now it's not free...but...it will replace MP3 in a near future?
rolleyes.gif

Well, for me it already has replaced LAME for my homepage sound files... wink.gif It's only useful for bitrates up to ~96-112 kbps, because above that the SBR technology makes things worse again than using plain MP3. By the way, Coding Technology is aware of that and does not promote any such rumours as "beats LAME -aps at 128 kbps or even lower" and so on. They express the estimated sound quality improvements very clearly and unmistakenly on their website and even in the help file that comes with the free player/encoder from Thomson ("64 kbps sounds a little bit better than an standard MP3 file at 96 kbps"). They also do not suggest to push mp3PRO's bitrate up to 128 kbps and more with the variable bitrate settings in order to compete with standard formats at that bitrate, but they limit the usable bitrates to 96 kbps CBR in MusicMatch JukeBox instead, as far as I know.

So mp3PRO can easily replace low bitrate MP3 encodings because of its much higher quality, if you don't have to rely on an available portable player right now. But probably there will be some in the near future, because RCA is already late on its time schedule for a flash update of their Lyra players (last Christmas).

Another question is the long-term future of this format, because it will probably be replaced with aacPlus from the same company as soon as they (and the MPEG working group) are ready to release the codec. As mp3PRO is not part of any MPEG standard (and will never be), its basis for a further industry development is much smaller than for aacPlus that will be a core part of the worldwide MPEG-4 standard.

But until this happens, you can of course use mp3PRO for low bitrate encodings happily like me. wink.gif By the way, there will at last be an input plugin for Winamp 3.x in February, says Coding Technologies, so these problems will also be a past-time story then.

This post has been edited by hans-jürgen: Jan 16 2003, 08:45


--------------------
myspace.com/bluezzbastardzz
myspace.com/indigorocks
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Ivan Dimkovic
post Jan 16 2003, 09:17
Post #6


Nero MPEG4 developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1466
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 8



AAC+ will be standardized in May - it is already in FPDAM stage with finished specifications.

All MPEG-4 natural audio member companies and M4IF will do their best to promote this format which proven to be the best in terms of perceived quality in the EBU listening tests revisited.

SBR in AAC is much more flexible than in MP3Pro, and of course, allows natural VBR (25-40 kbps for "lower" and 40-60 kbps for "higher" quality - all 44.1 kHz stereo) - And, the best of all, it is not so complex regarding CPU usage in the decoder smile.gif Since it is a standard, it could be implemented by anyone (more decoders and maybe encoders :-)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
hans-jürgen
post Jan 16 2003, 15:10
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 573
Joined: 2-August 02
From: Hamburg, Germany
Member No.: 2898



QUOTE (Ivan Dimkovic @ Jan 16 2003 - 09:17 AM)
AAC+ will be standardized in May -  it is already in FPDAM stage with finished specifications.

Yeah, I know... wink.gif

QUOTE
All MPEG-4 natural audio member companies and M4IF will do their best to promote this format which proven to be the best in terms of perceived quality in the EBU listening tests revisited.


By the way, did you already see the full and complete EBU report from the 2002 listening tests somewhere? I only know the excerpts by Martin Dietz (only dealing with the results from the IRT in Munich) and the business newsletter from Yahoo from Dec 6, 2002, where someone claims mp3PRO to be the winner at 64 kbps and not aacPlus which won at 48 kbps (see Audiocoding.com's industry news for the link). I don't know where Yahoo has got these informations from, because I didn't bother to phone them for their "full report". wink.gif

QUOTE
SBR in AAC is much more flexible than in MP3Pro, and of course, allows natural VBR (25-40 kbps for "lower" and 40-60 kbps for "higher" quality - all 44.1 kHz stereo)


That's interesting, why is it more flexible, because of the higher efficiency of AAC at low bitrates compared to MP3 or for some other reasons? And these kbps limits will be the default ones that get implemented into the MPEG-4 standard, or will the user be able to decide which bitrates should use SBR and which not?

QUOTE
And, the best of all,  it is not so complex regarding CPU usage in the decoder smile.gif


You mean, even on my PC? "If it can make it here, it'll make it anywhere..." [Frankie] wink.gif

QUOTE
Since it is a standard, it could be implemented by anyone (more decoders and maybe encoders smile.gif


Yes, Nero AAC+ looks even better than Nero AAC... B)


--------------------
myspace.com/bluezzbastardzz
myspace.com/indigorocks
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: 25th July 2014 - 10:07