IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Nero AAC vs. iTunes AAC (spectrum-wise)
subinbar
post Jun 15 2011, 03:35
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 10-June 11
Member No.: 91381



I'm torn between using NeroAACEnc or iTunes to encode my lossless collection for mobile use. Nero uses a lowpass filter, while iTunes Plus does not.

Theoretically, can Nero's lowpass settings affect sound quality at higher bitrates (256kbps)? Or by eliminating higher frequencies that the ears can't hear, does Nero make more bandwidth available to lower frequencies that the ear CAN hear? I do not have the equipment and/or ears necessary to consistently tell the difference between these two encoders when encoding from a lossless source. However, I have found that transcoding from a lossy source, I can usually tell a slight difference in the high frequencies (Nero doesn't preserve as well as iTunes IMO... or Vorbis for that matter)

I took some screenshots of spectrums of these 4 different files-

Original Lossless file (36.2 MB)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5637223/Original.jpg

iTunes AAC+ (256 ABR) (10.3 MB)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5637223/iTunesPlus.jpg

Nero q.7 (10.5 MB)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5637223/NeroQ7.jpg

Nero 256 ABR (9.92 MB)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5637223/Nero256ABR.jpg

You can hardly see a difference between the iTunes file and the original source.

But again, I can't hear the difference between these files, but I'd like to think that there are some people who can. And my perfectionist mind wants my music to look the same as it's source. cool.gif

Which encoder do you guys prefer? I welcome your opinions, theories, and any listening tests that you can point me to.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
subinbar
post Jun 15 2011, 04:32
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 29
Joined: 10-June 11
Member No.: 91381



QUOTE (saratoga @ Jun 15 2011, 04:21) *
QUOTE (subinbar @ Jun 14 2011, 22:35) *
I took some screenshots of spectrums of these 4 different files-


Theres no reason to ever do this.



I find it very interesting to see how an encoder deals with higher frequencies. Why do you say there is no reason?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Jun 15 2011, 04:35
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 5039
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (subinbar @ Jun 14 2011, 23:32) *
QUOTE (saratoga @ Jun 15 2011, 04:21) *
QUOTE (subinbar @ Jun 14 2011, 22:35) *
I took some screenshots of spectrums of these 4 different files-


Theres no reason to ever do this.



I find it very interesting to see how an encoder deals with higher frequencies. Why do you say there is no reason?


Such high frequencies are just noise. How the encoder deals with them isn't interesting. And the spectrograph just tells you if theres a low pass in use, not if they're actually being reproduced.
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: 21st October 2014 - 12:16