IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Comparing August and February Nero AAC Encoder release
muaddib
post Mar 3 2008, 17:26
Post #1





Group: Developer
Posts: 398
Joined: 14-October 01
Member No.: 289



There were some complaints from user on HA about August version of Nero AAC encoder quality compared to February 2007 release.
But there were not much samples provided to back this up. Namely only guruboolez provided one sample. guruboolez is unfortunately not available since beginning of this year.
Can you please help us providing more examples where it is easily noticeable that February version produces worse results than the August one. Also please point me to any thread that I missed where such sample was provided.
Please provide very short samples (5-15 seconds) where the problem is evident, together with parameters used for encoding.
This information is needed to improve next release of Nero AAC encoder, so if you are interested in improving the quality please help us.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
eevan
post Mar 3 2008, 22:48
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 537
Joined: 9-April 07
From: Belgrade, Serbia
Member No.: 42357



Here is my sample.
It is 9.887s long opening of „Flos florum", a motet by Guillaume Dufay.

Files in the archive http://rapidshare.com/files/96827886/flos.rar (3152 KB):
  • flos-orig.ape
  • flos-august.mp4 (neroaacenc.exe 1.1.34.2 -q 0.45)
  • flos-february.mp4 (neroaacenc.exe 1.0.7.0 -q 0.45)
  • flos-august.png (Adobe Audition screenshots showing the problem…
  • flos-february.png …and the difference in the two builds)
I hope it's helpful!


--------------------
If age or weaknes doe prohibyte bloudletting you must use boxing
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
muaddib
post Mar 4 2008, 10:56
Post #3





Group: Developer
Posts: 398
Joined: 14-October 01
Member No.: 289



QUOTE (eevan @ Mar 3 2008, 22:48) *
[*]flos-august.png (Adobe Audition screenshots showing the problem…
[*]flos-february.png …and the difference in the two builds)

Thank you very much for this contribution. However graphs are not needed.
Additional information that is needed is what difference do you hear? At which position?
We will not try to make graphs look better, we will try new version of the encoder to sound better (by making it have less differences from original that could be heard).
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic


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: 28th August 2014 - 14:58