This is a personal listening test, and my plan was to base it on classical music only. Targeted bitrate is 64 kbps VBR and the test includes the two most modern & efficient formats at this bitrate I know: Opus and MPEG-D USAC, also named xHE-AAC.
This test must answer a few questions of mine:
- To my ears which format sounds the best at ~64 kbps?
- Is in 2020 any format at 64 kbps good enough for my own taste and my own music?
- Does any format compete with MP3 at 128 kbps? Or, in another word, can the new formats be 50% more efficient at the selected bitrate?
- Is the new implementation of USAC (named exhale) already competitive?
General principles- VBR only test: I’ll try to test all format with a VBR implementation.
- 6 formats: I’ll limit the comparison to 6 formats/settings to limit the effort and the statistical noise.
- Low and high anchors: my plan is to constraint comments and marks with low and high anchor. For this reason, the numbers of real competitors will shrink to four but I’ll try to make anchors as interesting as possible.
- Number of samples: my purpose is to test as many samples as I can. Instead of testing 12 samples and ABXing each 8 times, I’d rather test 100 samples blindly on ABC/HR procedure.
- Difficulty: I’ll try to avoid killer samples and rather use common music samples.
SamplesThe samples are selected from two big boxset (55CD+29CD=84CD). They are both vast anthologies of classical music. The average FLAC bitrate for these 84 CD is 580 kbps, which is exactly the same that the average bitrate of my entire classical music library (it’s a big one). I add to this set seven other CD all with extreme FLAC bitrate (<300 kbps and >1000 kbps) which makes a basis of 91 CD.
The samples I extract from these discs are either famous hits of classical music or moments I really like (which is a big plus when I have to listen hundred times each sample). There is no over representation of killer or critical samples here but some samples may be sometimes hard to encode. I expect on the other side some samples to be fully transparent even at 64 kbps.
BitrateAverage bitrate is not calculated from short samples which is in my opinion a bad idea (especially for VBR encodings). My bitrate table is consequently based on the encodings of the full 84 CD (2 boxset without extreme additional discs) which is representative of my FLAC entire collection. My guess is that this selection should also be very representative for other lossless and lossy encoders.
CompetitorsI had to keep four contenders and to choose two anchors:
- OPUS: Probably the real challenger at this bitrate. It’s free, Open-Source, native support on Android. Excellent VBR adjustement. I choose to maintain the –bitrate 64 mode even if it exceeds the desired and targeted bitrate. TESTED: opus 1.31 –bitrate 64 . AVERAGE BITRATE: 69,0 kbps
- USAC / xHE-AAC: One of the last MPEG audio tool and the last one in the AAC family. I asked to C.R.Helmrich the permission to use exhale for this test, because it is really a new tool and obviously can’t claim the same maturity level of all other competitors. It must be noted that exhale doesn’t include at this time SBR which is a really known tool for improving sound quality of both MP3 (MP3Pro) and AAC (HE-AAC) at 64 kbps. So, my guess is that exhale won’t probably shine at this bitrate but it will be interesting to see how it performs against older formats like LC-AAC, HE-AAC and MP3 and their most mature implementations. Exhale is open-source and VBR. TESTED: exhale 1.0.4 “E” -mode 1 with resampling done by SSRC (no 44.1 Hz support at this VBR setting with 1.0.4). AVERAGE BITRATE: 65,3 kbps
- LC-AAC: It should be interesting to see how AAC without parametric techniques (SBR & Parametric Stereo) performs to USAC deprived of the same toys. For this test I chose iTunes/Apple AAC which has a VBR mode that end near 64 kbps. TESTED: qaac 2.67, CoreAudioToolbox 7.10.9.0, AAC-LC Encoder, TVBR q18, Quality 96 . AVERAGE BITRATE: 62,9 kbps
- HE-AAC: High Efficiency profile brings SBR technique to AAC, and it makes a real difference at 64 kbps. I want to measure the benefits of this technique. As my goal is to compare VBR encoders I choose FDK-AAC which allows VBR with HE-profile (iTunes AAC doesn’t). TESTED: fdkaac 1.0.0, libfdk-aac 4.0.0, VBR mode 2 . AVERAGE BITRATE: 69,3 kbps
- MP3: MP3 at 64 kbps could sound as a joke. Therefore, I used it as low anchor. As all other encoders I choose to keep the VBR mode. Unlike true competitors I finely adjust VBR mode to be the closest possible to 64 kbps. I also decided to use MP3 for high anchor but at 128 kbps. Same principle: it will be VBR and adjusted to be as close as possible to 128 kbps. Low anchor is LAME 3.100 at -V 8,85 (63,7 kbps) and high anchor is LAME 3.100 at -V 4,38 (127,8 kbps)
ToolsJava ABC/HR tool was my tool of choice mainly because it corrects the small volume difference between encoded files. I fed the ABCHR tool with WAV file: I decoded and resampled eveything at 48000 Hz to avoid playback issue (low anchor is 22050 Hz, USAC is 32000 Hz, Opus 48000 Hz and AAC is 44100 Hz). For this step I used foobar2000 and SSRC/dBpoweramp resampling component.
RESULTS
(A bit messed, sorry kamedo)
(https://zupimages.net/up/20/23/tgnw.png)
CONCLUSION- The winner of this test is a huge surprise. USAC is supposed to sound good in theory but how could a new implementation sound so good? It’s impressive! The encoder doesn’t have the quality issues HE-AAC and OPUS often have. There’s some preecho from time to time, some minor distortions common to many low/mid bitrate encoders. Nothing unusal I would say and on most sample nothing really irritating. Output is clean with no weird effects that often Opus and HE-AAC have. Average notation is close to the “not annoying” step but there are some accidents. Exhale performed also worse on the second boxset which is more baroque or early instruments oriented (commonly harder to encode). Exhale is therefore quite good on average but at 64 kbps it’s still not strong enough to be satisfying for a peace-of-mind daily usage. Anyway, I never expected such high quality at 64 kbps.
- Opus is not bad but is clearly worse than USAC and doesn’t even beat (from statistical analysis point of view) HE-AAC. On many samples the artifacts generated by OPUS irritates me a lot: fat sound, coarseness, hiss—especially on tonal parts. There are also more basic distortions and some smearing too. Several time I found some dullness which I couldn’t understand (lowpass is way too high to hear it) but at the very end of the test I understand that it may be explained by a kind of stereo narrowing. In other words, Opus has a clear sound signature and I wouldn’t call it a good one. Funny thing: I immediately recognized the Ogg Vorbis sound signature I often heard and described in my test a decade ago. Clearly Opus and Vorbis share the same DNA. Anyway, I expected a much better performance here.
- LC-AAC performed quite poorly. I’m not really surprised here. But I frankly expected a better performance from iTunes AAC which I always liked, especially on “easy” tracks (like simple piano samples). Perhaps is it a TVBR issue: bitrate drops really low and that may affect sound quality. I haven’t really investigated further because I won’t use LC-AAC at 64 kbps. Lowpass was a biggest issue and the next VBR step would partially solve this without inflating too much the bitrate. If I had to do the test again I would perhaps go for testing LC-AAC at 70 kbps rather than 63 kbps. So, there’s a poor sound quality for the AAC core (without SBR) which makes in comparison Exhale core (without SBR too) really extraordinary.
- HE-AAC is a real and big improvement over LC-AAC but I must immediately add that SBR is far from a panacea. SBR brings indeed very often the same sound issues (a lot of grain/harsh noise + some metallic color). It’s nothing new: this sound signature was already audible when MP3Pro was released. If twenty years ago this defect is still here I guess nothing will change in the future. So my bet is that SBR won’t bring anything except damage to USAC at 64 kbps which is probably too good for SBR.
- Low anchor was clearly low quality enough. I must insist that I often had some troubles to rank MP3@64 and AAC@64. While they sound very different, MP3 has often less irritating distortions but is much more muffled. It’s like choosing between a highly macroblocked jpeg file and a 64 colors GIF. Problems are both huge but very different, and rating is sometimes a simple matter of taste. For the anecdote, MP3 at 64 kbps could sometimes be transparent (on low pitched piano recordings) and on one or two samples I ranked it better than Opus and USAC!
- High Anchor is LAME at VBR 4,38. This setting gives me 128 kbps on classical music but I must warn people that I’m pretty sure bitrate will be higher on other musical genres with this setting. But here, and to my ears, MP3 at 128 kbps VBR outperforms every competitor… at half bitrate. On 75 samples there were only two encoding accidents (an organ and a harpsichord samples). LAME performs excellently here and still shine at least when compared to low bitrate competitors.
- Last but not least, I must really insist that the sound signature of four encoders (low anchor, LC-AAC, HE-AAC, OPUS and to some extend Exhale) was really obvious and it was really easy to guess them. I often wrote my own guess in the ABCHR comment tool and I was nearly always right. Is it important? Yes maybe, because I knew what I rated. It’s a bit like blindly test apples and… fish
Some reflections…Now my question is: am I different to other people to rank Opus so low? Or is simply Opus not as efficient on classical music?
Tonal issues on Opus have already been reported (by Jean-Marc Valin itself on this board). And classical music is often tonal. I guess there are also other sound characteristics that makes classical behave differently with lossy encoders. Volume might play a role: classical recordings don’t usually suffer from so-called loudness war. I remember reading somewhere here that some opus encoding tools can be troubled because it can’t guess at what volume playback is (someone could explain this better or correct me). Indeed, the Opus hiss/fat sound is not as irritating at quieter playback volume.
But the alternative to these explanations is a different subjectivity.
APPENDIX TEST: CONTEMPORY MUSIC
To answer this, I decided to not test further classical music (yes, my original plan was to do a second batch of classical samples…) but to test all these codecs again with modern music. It’s an appendix to this test because it’s not as rigorous (I can’t get a large CD collection nor build any solid bitrate table). My musical culture is nearly inexistent, so I visited Billboard.com website, and I took one of their playlist called “decade-end charts: hot 100 songs 2010s”. I managed to get a lossless copy of the 25 first titles of this chart. For each song, I create 20 seconds sample from selecting each time the music from the same range (00h01m00s to 00h01m20s). It can’t be less biased here. Again, there shouldn’t be any over representation of killer sample but only common music.
https://www.billboard.com/charts/decade-end/hot-100
I tested the same encoders: lame, exhale, opus, FDK-AAC and iTunes AAC. But I lowered the VBR settings for both low and high anchor (V9 which seems to be a bit higher than 70 kbps; V5 which is close to 130 kbps). I also boost iTunes LC-AAC quality by using TVBR27 instead of TVBR18 (bitrate is now much closer to 64 kbps). Other competitors haven’t changed. Methodology is the same.
Results of additional test (25 samples from a popular Billboard list)(https://zupimages.net/up/20/23/dlxe.png)
Conclusion of this additional testResults are significantly different with a totally different kind of samples. Opus sounds as the most convincing encoder—and while it’s still statistically tied, its average ranking is clearly superior to MP3 VBR at 130 kbps! Sound quality is really great and there’s no more coarseness or fat signature (or it’s too low to be noticed). I only get one failure on 25 files (but for this one every encoders were also bad). Exhale USAC is a bit less impressive here. It’s tied with both Opus and MP3@130 which is again remarkable for a such new-born encoder. But it has some more accident so I would clearly prefer Opus which seems safer. HE-AAC is a big step lower and thanks to SBR artifacts not very far from LC-AAC. The latter performed better than expected now that lowpass has been raised and the audible distortions were not as bad as with classical music samples. An educated guess would be that LAME at -V5 is the best quality you may get with MP3 format at around 128 kbps. And on these 25 non-discriminative samples our high anchor didn’t shine at all: many failures, several strong distortions.
I also must add few things: on this additional test I was unable to guess the encoders name. HE-AAC had maybe the strongest sound signature but the other don’t. I was truly lost and the few guess I did were usually wrong. Many samples from this billboard list were also very disturbing from a technical point of vue: they indeed sound distorted. I don’t know what they’re doing during the mastering stage. Voices are sometimes curious: is it an Auto-Tune effect? As a consequence I had sometimes a lot of trouble to find the encoded version as the reference already sounds so distorted.
Final wordsMy original plan wasn’t to oppose classical music to popular modern recordings. But it was instructive. Opus isn’t the killer-tool I expected when I first started this testing procedure but I must admit that it really shines with louder and modern music—and 64 kbps encoding is really satisfying for such music. USAC brings a very interesting alternative to OPUS at low/mid bitrate: sometimes better, sometimes worse (and clearly better with classical) but much cleaner. I don’t know what USAC offers as low encoding tools but compared to SBR and Opus algorithm (is it “band folding”?) sound is way more proper. SBR technique seems to be more damaging: I dislike it and HE-AAC is clearly worse on pop music.
To answer to my first questions:
- To my ears which format sounds the best at ~64 kbps?
=> it depends. Exhale is better for classical; Opus seems to have my preference for other music.
- Is in 2020 any format at 64 kbps good enough for my own taste and my own music?
=> again, it depends. Opus is really fine at 64 kbps but absolutely not usable for my classical library. Exhale/USAC is interesting with classical but I would appreciate some improvements.
- Does any format compete with MP3 at 128 kbps? Or, in another word, can the new formats be 50% more efficient at the selected bitrate?
=> MP3 is stronger on classical music; but seems to be beaten by 64 kbps contenders with pop music
- Is the new implementation of USAC (named exhale) already competitive?
=> Yes, it performs better than many mature encoders of other formats. Congratulations!
Detailed tables(clic to enlarge)
(https://zupimages.net/up/20/23/phwm.png) (https://zupimages.net/viewer.php?id=20/23/phwm.png)
(https://zupimages.net/up/20/23/967j.png) (https://zupimages.net/viewer.php?id=20/23/967j.png)
PS: If asked I can upload samples later
ThanksA big thank you to:
- Kamedo2 for the amazing graph tool: https://listening-test.coresv.net/graphmaker5.htm
- Christian R. Helmrich for allowing me to test Exhale “E” 1.0.4
- Peter Pawlowski for foobar2000
- Schnofler for his java ABC/HR tool
- Christopher “Kode54” Snowhill for the USAC component
- Jean-Marc Valin for his work on Opus
- John33, Netranger and other members providing binaries
Nice, Guru. Thanks!
I'll try to digest all of this at some point.
First observation that comes to mind is that both FhG (Winamp 5.666 (http://forums.winamp.com/showpost.php?p=2974870&postcount=1)) and Apple HE-AAC encoders should/could be somewhat superior to FDK HE-AAC encoder (at least in my experience). However FDK is popular choice for many people.
Congratulations, exhale, congratulations, Guru!
(https://listening-test.coresv.net/img2/img119333-3.png)
% Sample data.(ff123's FRIEDMAN version 1.24 compatible)
MP3 LC-AAC HE-AAC OPUS USAC / xHE-AAC (MP3)
%feature 10 LAME 3.100 iTunes,CoreAudioToolbox 7.10.9.0 libfdk-aac 4.0.0 Opus 1.3.1 exhale 1.0.4 LAME 3.100
%feature 11 -V 8,85 TVBR q18 Quality 96 VBR mode 2 –bitrate 64 -mode 1 -V 4,38
%feature 12 63.7kbps 62.9kbps 69.3kbps 69.0kbps 65.3kbps 127.8kbps
1.3 2.0 2.5 4.0 4.5 4.8
1.5 2.0 3.0 3.8 3.7 4.9
3.0 2.0 4.7 4.0 4.0 5.0
1.5 2.0 3.0 4.2 3.2 4.9
2.0 1.5 4.0 4.7 4.0 5.0
1.3 1.5 2.5 2.7 3.8 4.4
1.0 2.0 2.7 3.0 3.7 4.2
3.0 2.5 3.7 4.0 4.0 5.0
1.5 3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 5.0
1.0 1.6 2.5 3.0 4.5 4.7
2.5 3.5 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
1.0 1.5 3.0 4.8 3.8 4.5
1.0 1.6 3.7 2.5 4.0 5.0
2.0 2.5 4.6 4.0 3.5 5.0
1.3 1.7 2.2 2.5 3.2 3.5
1.0 1.5 2.5 2.0 4.0 4.5
1.0 1.5 3.0 1.8 3.7 4.7
5.0 3.2 5.0 3.7 4.0 5.0
1.0 2.5 3.5 2.0 4.8 4.0
4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
1.3 1.0 3.0 2.5 4.7 4.0
1.0 1.5 3.0 2.0 5.0 3.5
1.5 2.0 4.5 4.0 4.0 4.5
1.5 1.8 4.0 3.7 5.0 5.0
1.0 2.0 4.5 5.0 3.7 5.0
1.0 2.0 4.5 3.0 3.7 5.0
2.5 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
1.0 1.3 2.3 2.0 4.6 5.0
1.5 2.0 2.0 2.5 4.5 5.0
2.5 3.5 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
1.0 1.5 1.8 4.4 2.5 4.0
1.5 2.3 3.5 4.5 3.5 5.0
1.5 3.0 2.0 5.0 3.8 5.0
1.0 2.2 2.7 3.8 3.4 3.8
2.0 2.5 3.5 5.0 5.0 5.0
1.0 1.8 2.2 2.5 2.8 5.0
2.5 2.5 4.0 3.5 4.0 5.0
1.0 1.4 2.3 1.8 3.5 4.0
3.5 2.0 2.0 4.0 5.0 5.0
1.5 2.0 3.5 2.5 4.5 4.5
1.0 1.5 2.3 2.0 3.8 3.3
2.5 4.0 4.8 3.5 4.7 5.0
2.0 2.2 2.6 3.7 3.0 5.0
2.0 3.4 1.0 2.5 4.5 4.5
1.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 4.0 5.0
2.0 2.5 3.5 5.0 5.0 4.5
1.0 1.5 2.2 2.2 5.0 4.7
2.0 1.7 2.0 2.0 3.0 1.8
1.8 2.1 3.0 4.0 2.5 4.7
1.0 3.0 3.5 3.8 3.0 4.6
1.2 1.7 3.7 3.0 2.5 5.0
1.0 1.7 2.3 1.4 2.6 4.0
1.0 1.3 4.0 2.0 2.5 4.5
1.0 2.0 2.3 2.7 3.5 3.9
1.5 3.0 3.7 4.5 4.0 4.2
1.0 1.4 2.0 2.3 4.5 3.7
1.0 4.0 3.3 3.0 2.7 5.0
1.0 1.8 5.0 2.5 2.7 5.0
1.0 1.0 2.7 3.2 3.7 5.0
1.0 1.5 2.5 2.5 5.0 5.0
1.0 2.0 1.8 2.5 5.0 5.0
1.3 1.5 2.0 2.0 3.8 4.5
1.0 1.8 2.3 2.7 4.4 5.0
3.0 2.5 3.9 4.5 4.2 4.8
1.5 1.0 2.5 2.5 2.8 4.2
1.0 2.9 2.0 2.3 4.0 3.2
5.0 3.5 4.5 5.0 4.0 5.0
1.0 1.7 2.0 2.3 5.0 5.0
2.0 3.0 5.0 4.5 4.0 5.0
5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
3.5 3.0 5.0 4.5 3.8 5.0
1.0 1.0 2.0 1.9 2.5 2.2
1.0 1.0 2.2 2.2 3.5 3.0
1.0 1.5 2.2 2.0 3.0 4.2
Nice, Guru. Thanks!
I'll try to digest all of this at some point.
First observation that comes to mind is that both FhG (Winamp 5.666 (http://forums.winamp.com/showpost.php?p=2974870&postcount=1)) and Apple HE-AAC encoders should/could be somewhat superior to FDK HE-AAC encoder (at least in my experience). However FDK is popular choice for many people.
I also hesitate to use FHGAAC instead of FDKAAC. Main issue was the average bitrate. Winamp's AAC encoder only gives the possibility of testing a VBR step which ends at 59 kbps or the next which ends at 90 kbps. I found 59 kbps a bit low, especially if OPUS is used at an average bitrate of 69 kbps. So FDKAAC with its 69 kbps seemed to be less problematic. And as you said, it's also more popular, and is also cross-platform, easier to find and not as outdated as Winamp.
Apple's AAC encoder doesn't allow VBR with HEAAC. So I discarded it.
I haven't include Nero in my bitrate table but I think it do VBR with HE-AAC. But development has ceased for ten years.
Congratulations, exhale, congratulations, Guru!
Thank you Kamedo2 :)
It's much better now but I can't edit my first post anymore :/
I also noticed a mistake in the last table: I'll redo it later.
"Apple's AAC encoder doesn't allow VBR with HEAAC."
AAC-HE Encoder, CVBR 64kbps, Quality 96
anyway, a general understanding of the features of the exhale comparison gives. thx
by the way, this is a great reason to compare qaac tvbr lc/cvbr he, fdk lc/he/he2, faac tns/notns/pns0..10.
Was USAC at 22Khz sampling rate? If so, how does Opus 22Khz compare to 22Khz USAC?
Here is the bitrate table (
full CD for classical music only—the full table exceed the limit of 20.000 characters). The screenshot include the bitrate of the Billboard playlist.
FLAC MP3 LCAAC HEAAC OPUS USAC MP3
BOX N°1
A.01. Brahms [Claudio Abbado & Wiener Philharmoniker] 21 Ungarische Tanze (DG, C… ORCHESTRAL 602 kbps 66 63 68 65 68 133
A.02. Beethoven [Amadeus SQ] Quartette Op. 59 No. 1, Op. 131 (DG, CD, 1960)… CHAMBER 690 kbps 69 65 64 71 76 144
A.03. Chopin [Martha Argerich] 24 Preludes Op. 28 (DG, CD, 1975)… PIANO 470 kbps 60 61 75 70 57 117
A.04. Ravel [Daniel Barenboim & Orchestre de Paris] Boléro, La Valse, etc (DG, C… ORCHESTRAL 557 kbps 62 62 70 66 66 128
A.05. Debussy [Arturo Benedetti Michelangeli] Préludes, Vol. 1 (DG, CD, 1978)… PIANO 499 kbps 57 63 77 69 63 125
A.06. Bernstein [Leonard Bernstein] West Side Story (DG, CD, 1985)… LYRICAL 597 kbps 64 65 67 65 67 132
A.07. Mozart [Karl Böhm & Wiener Philharmoniker] Requiem (DG, CD, 1971)… CHORAL & ORCHESTRAL 619 kbps 71 64 70 63 64 138
A.08. Stravinski [Pierre Boulez & Cleveland Orchestra] Petrouchka, The Rite of S… ORCHESTRAL 559 kbps 61 65 72 67 64 126
A.09. Vivaldi [Giuliano Carmignola & Venice Baroque Orchestra] Concertos RV 331,… CONCERTO VIOLIN 650 kbps 70 69 69 74 74 139
A.10. VA [Placido Domingo, Carlo Maria Giulini & LA Philharmonic Orchestra] Oper… LYRICAL 568 kbps 65 61 64 69 67 125
A.11. Mahler [Gustavo Dudamel & Simon Bolivar Youth Orchestra] Symphony No. 5 (D… ORCHESTRAL 498 kbps 58 62 69 66 58 115
A.12. Bach [Emerson SQ] Die Kunst der Fuge (DG, CD, 2003)… CHAMBER 613 kbps 70 68 70 72 68 135
A.13. Schubert [Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau & Gerald Moore] Winterreise (DG, CD, 19… VOCAL 532 kbps 64 69 84 69 69 133
A.14. Bach [Pierre Fournier] Sei Solo. a Violoncello senza Basso accompagnato (A… CELLO 670 kbps 65 56 70 70 65 130
A.15. Bach [Pierre Fournier] Sei Solo. a Violoncello senza Basso accompagnato (A… CELLO 667 kbps 64 53 69 70 66 127
A.16. Verdi [Ferenc Fricsay & RIAS Symphonie Berlin] Requiem (DG, CD, 1954)… CHORAL & ORCH… (MONO) 459 kbps 40 39 45 55 49 83
A.17. Schumann [Wilhelm Furtwängler & Berliner Philharmoniker] Symphonie No. 4 (… ORCHESTRAL (MONO) 479 kbps 40 37 42 58 50 82
A.18. Monteverdi [John Eliot Gardiner & English Baroque Soloists] Vespro della b… CHORAL & ORCHESTRAL 534 kbps 63 68 72 64 62 126
A.19. Monteverdi [John Eliot Gardiner & English Baroque Soloists] Vespro della b… CHORAL & ORCHESTRAL 522 kbps 63 66 71 69 65 127
A.20. Beethoven [Emil Gilels] Piano Sonaten - Waldstein, Les Adieux, Appassionat… PIANO 426 kbps 58 61 74 70 57 113
A.21. VA [Reinhard Goebel & Musica Antiqua Köln] Pachelbel, Handel, Vivaldi, Bac… ORCHESTRAL 779 kbps 70 63 68 73 79 146
A.22. VA [Hélène Grimaud, Esa-Pekka Salonen & Swedish Radio Orchestra] Credo (DG… CONCERTO 515 kbps 56 63 70 70 56 109
A.23. Bach [Hilary Hahn, Jeffrey Kahane & LA Chamber Orchestra] Violin Concertos… CONCERTO VIOLIN 728 kbps 72 65 68 73 75 144
A.24. VA [Vladimir Horowitz] Horowitz in Moscow (DG, CD, 1986)… PIANO 435 kbps 57 56 76 80 64 126
A.25. Orff [Eugen Jochum & Orchester Opern Berlin] Carmina Burana (DG, CD, 1968)… CHORAL & ORCHESTRAL 650 kbps 66 64 77 65 67 138
A.26. Beethoven [Herbert von Karajan & Berliner Philharmoniker] Symphonie No. 9 … ORCHESTRAL 685 kbps 70 64 70 65 66 142
A.27. Beethoven [Wilhelm Kempff, Ferdinand Leitner & Berliner Philharmoniker] Kl… CONCERTO 590 kbps 71 61 73 69 62 135
A.28. Beethoven [Carlos Kleiber & Wiener Philharmoniker] Symphonien Nr. 5 & Nr. … ORCHESTRAL 631 kbps 67 64 69 66 66 135
A.29. Haendel [Magdalena Kozena, Andrea Marcon & Venice Baroque Orchestra] Ah! m… LYRICAL 548 kbps 63 64 73 68 66 125
A.30. Dvorák [Rafael Kubelik & Berliner Philharmoniker] Symphonies No.8 & 9 (DG,… ORCHESTRAL 622 kbps 65 65 69 66 66 134
A.31. VA [Lang Lang, Daniel Barenboim, Chicago Symphony Orchestra] Tchaïkovsky, … CONCERTO 502 kbps 63 62 70 69 58 116
A.32. Mendessohn [Lorin Maazel & Berliner Philharmoniker] Italienische, Reformat… ORCHESTRAL 648 kbps 70 63 68 66 66 139
A.33. VA [Mischa Maisky & Semyon Bychkov] Adagio (DG, CD, 1992)… CHAMBER 518 kbps 61 61 70 68 66 121
A.34. Berlioz [Igor Markevitch & Orchestre Lamoureux] Symphonie Fantastique (DG,… ORCHESTRAL 664 kbps 68 65 71 66 70 142
A.35. Praetorius [Paul McCreesh & Gabrieli Consort & Players] Christmette (Archi… CHORAL & ORCHESTRAL 548 kbps 63 61 67 65 65 126
A.36. Rameau [Marc Minkowski & Les Musiciens du Louvre] Une Symphonie imaginaire… ORCHESTRAL 656 kbps 67 63 72 67 67 135
A.37. Brahms [Anne-Sophie Mutter, Herbert von Karajan & Berliner Philharmoniker]… CONCERTO 607 kbps 66 60 63 71 69 131
A.38. VA [Anna Netrebko, Gianandrea Noseda] Opera Arias (DG, CD, 2003)… LYRICAL 567 kbps 66 68 75 68 67 130
A.39. Tchaikovsky, Wienawsky [David and Igor Oistrakh, Konwitschny] Violin Conce… CONCERTO (MONO) 465 kbps 43 38 43 63 52 86
A.40. VA [Anne-Sofie von Otter, Reinhard Goebel & Musica Antiqua Köln] Lamenti (… LYRICAL 539 kbps 61 66 73 69 67 123
A.41. Vivaldi [Trevor Pinnock & The English Concert] Le Quattro Stagioni (DG, CD… CHAMBER 687 kbps 69 66 68 73 77 141
A.42. Chopin [Maria João Pirès] Nocturnes (DG, CD, 1996)… PIANO 390 kbps 50 65 67 71 50 95
A.43. Chopin [Maria João Pirès] Nocturnes (DG, CD, 1996)… PIANO 400 kbps 52 63 68 72 47 96
A.44. Scarlatti [Ivo Pogorelich] Sonaten (DG, CD, 1992)… PIANO 378 kbps 56 65 74 74 53 104
A.45. Chopin [Maurizio Pollini] Etudes (DG, CD, 1972)… PIANO 443 kbps 62 60 70 71 55 115
A.46. VA [Thomas Quasthoff, Christian Thielemann & Orchester Oper Berlin] Die St… VOCAL 545 kbps 65 67 71 65 64 125
A.47. Bach [Karl Richter & Münchener Bach-Orchester] h-Moll Messe (Archiv, CD, 1… CHORAL & ORCHESTRAL 657 kbps 72 66 68 67 66 140
A.48. Bach [Karl Richter & Münchener Bach-Orchester] h-Moll Messe (Archiv, CD, 1… CHORAL & ORCHESTRAL 658 kbps 70 66 67 65 67 139
A.49. Rachmaninov [Sviatoslav Richter, Stanislaw Wisloki & Warsaw Orchestra] Pia… CONCERTO ; PIANO 568 kbps 67 62 70 67 63 130
A.50. VA [Mstislav Rostropovitch, Herbert von Karajan & BPO] Dvorák, Tchaïkovski… CONCERTO 611 kbps 65 63 72 68 70 136
A.51. VA [Bryn Terfel, Malcolm Martineau] The Vagabond (DG, CD, 1995)… VOCAL 398 kbps 49 62 69 66 55 98
A.52. VA [Rolando Villazón, Daniele Callegari & Milano Orchestra] Cielo e Mar (D… LYRICAL 619 kbps 68 64 66 68 68 128
A.53. Bach [Helmut Walcha] Toccata & Fugue. Organ Works (Archiv, CD, 1959)… ORGAN 730 kbps 75 65 65 79 69 151
A.54. VA [Fritz Wunderlich & Hubert Giesen] Schumann, Beethoven, Schubert (DG, C… VOCAL 613 kbps 68 64 73 68 67 135
A.55. Liszt [Krystian Zimerman, Seiji Ozawa & Boston Symphony] Piano Concertos (… CONCERTO 521 kbps 63 62 69 69 62 121
AVERAGE (55CD) 570 kbps 63 kbps 62 kbps 69 kbps 68 kbps 64 kbps 126 kbps
BOX N°2 (29CD)
B.01. Couperin [Michel Chapuis, Francis Chapelet] Les Orgues Historiques (HM, CD… ORGAN 706 kbps 73 62 67 77 71 144
B.02. Muffat [René Saorgin] Apparatus Musico-Organisticus (HM, CD, 1972)… ORGAN 625 kbps 73 64 70 75 62 142
B.03. Purcell [Alfred Deller & Deller Consort] King Arthur (HM, CD, 1979)… LYRICAL 698 kbps 70 65 66 67 71 146
B.04. Purcell [Alfred Deller & Deller Consort] King Arthur ; The Folksong Recita… LYRICAL 653 kbps 67 70 80 68 70 142
B.05. Bingen & Anoymous [Various] Voices from the the Middle Ages (HM, CD, 1977…… CHORAL 585 kbps 65 71 80 72 71 132
B.06. Dufay [Paul Van Nevel & Huelgas Ensemble] Motets isorythmiques (HM, CD, 20… CHORAL 626 kbps 70 68 72 73 72 137
B.07. Bach [Philippe Herreweghe & La Chapelle Royale] Matthäus-Passion (HM, CD, … LYRICAL 584 kbps 68 69 71 67 65 136
B.08. Bach [Philippe Herreweghe & La Chapelle Royale] Matthäus-Passion (HM, CD, … LYRICAL 547 kbps 66 70 73 67 65 131
B.09. Bach [Philippe Herreweghe & La Chapelle Royale] Matthäus-Passion ; Musikal… LYRICAL 676 kbps 66 66 71 73 72 137
B.10. Bach [Fretwork] Die Kunst der Fuge BWV 1080 (HM, CD, 2002)… CHAMBER 658 kbps 67 62 68 75 72 138
B.11. Lully [William Christie & Les Arts Florissants] Atys (HM, CD, 1987)… LYRICAL 616 kbps 64 61 66 66 71 133
B.12. Lully [William Christie & Les Arts Florissants] Atys (HM, CD, 1987)… LYRICAL 587 kbps 63 61 68 67 70 129
B.13. Lully [William Christie & Les Arts Florissants] Atys (HM, CD, 1987)… LYRICAL 711 kbps 65 65 68 71 77 140
B.14. Monteverdi, Bieber, Vivaldi [Various] Various Works (HM, CD, 1995…2004)… CHAMBER 628 kbps 66 67 71 76 71 133
B.15. Telemann, D'Anglebert [Konrad Junghänel, Kenneth Gilbert] Various Works (H… LYRICAL ; HARPSICHORD 747 kbps 63 59 63 75 71 135
B.16. VA [Paul O'Dette] Lord Herbert of Cherbury's Lute Book (HM, CD, 1992)… LUTE 647 kbps 68 61 82 74 72 144
B.17. Banchieri, Telemann, Couperin, Schobert [Various] Various Works (HM, CD, 1… CHAMBER 725 kbps 69 68 68 71 74 145
B.18. Keiser [René Jacobs & Akademie für Alte Musik] Croesus (HM, CD, 2000)… LYRICAL 602 kbps 65 61 66 67 70 133
B.19. Keiser [René Jacobs & Akademie für Alte Musik] Croesus (HM, CD, 2000)… LYRICAL 585 kbps 64 62 66 67 69 131
B.20. Keiser [René Jacobs & Akademie für Alte Musik] Croesus (HM, CD, 2000)… LYRICAL 582 kbps 64 62 66 66 67 130
B.21. Haydn, Mozart [Various] Various Works (HM, CD, 1994…2007)… ORCHESTRAL 638 kbps 68 63 68 71 71 137
B.22. Rossini [Markus Creed & RIAS Kammerchor] Petite Messe solennelle (HM, CD, … CHORAL & ORCHESTRAL 488 kbps 59 65 70 66 60 118
B.23. Rossini, Schumann, Brahms, Wolf [Various] Various Works (HM, CD, 1969…2005… VARIOUS 546 kbps 64 64 75 71 66 128
B.24. Rameau, Beethoven [Alexandre Tharaud, Georges Pludermacher] Various Works … PIANO 449 kbps 57 63 73 72 56 114
B.25. Berlioz, de Falla [Philippe Herreweghe, Josep Pons] Nuits d'été ; El Amor … LYRICAL ; ORCHESTRAL 511 kbps 60 67 73 68 64 123
B.26. Schubert [Paul Lewis, Isabelle Faust, Alexander Melnikov] Fantaisie D934 &… PIANO 399 kbps 56 62 69 72 53 106
B.27. Chopin, Liszt, Chostakovitch [Cédric Tiberghien, Jerusalem SQ] Various Wor… CHAMBER 426 kbps 56 62 69 70 56 109
B.28. Chausson, Copland, Janacek [Alain Planès, Trio Wanderer] Various works (HM… VARIOUS 500 kbps 59 64 68 72 61 116
B.29. Janacek, Bartok, Part [Paul Hillier & Theater of Voices] Berliner Messe (H… VARIOUS 583 kbps 66 66 73 71 67 130
AVERAGE (29CD) 598 kbps 65 kbps 64 kbps 70 kbps 71 kbps 67 kbps 132 kbps
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
AVERAGE (84CD) 579 kbps 64 kbps 63 kbps 69 kbps 69 kbps 65 kbps 128 kbps
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
EXTRA CD: VERY LOW BITRATE
C.01. Feldman [Schleiermacher] The Late Piano Works, Vol.2 (MDG, CD, 2009) PIANO 219 kbps 22 56 59 68 40 51
C.02. Mompou [Perianes] Música Callada (Harmonia Mundi, CD, 2006) PIANO 274 kbps 38 61 64 69 40 84
C.03. Silvestrov [Blumina] Piano Works (Grand Piano) PIANO 255 kbps 36 57 62 69 39 76
C.04. VA [Haochen Zhang] Schumann, Liszt, Janacek & Brahms. Piano Works (BIS, CD, 2017)PIANO 308 kbps 46 59 65 69 42 91
AVERAGE (4CD) 264 kbps 36 kbps 58 kbps 63 kbps 69 kbps 40 kbps 76 kbps
EXTRA CD: VERY HIGH BITRATE
D.01. Bach [Moroney] Das Wohltemperierte Klavier (Harmonia Mundi, CD4, 1988 HARPSICHORD 1053 kbps 64 66 68 80 86 146
D.02. Byrd [Tilney] Contrapuntal Byrd (Music & Arts, CD, 2016) HARPSICHORD 1014 kbps 65 67 71 81 86 148
D.03. Haendel [Lesaulnier] Al piacere del signor (ORF, CD, 2008) HARPSICHORD 1019 kbps 67 65 65 76 83 145
AVERAGE (5CD) 1029 kbps 65 kbps 66 kbps 68 kbps 79 kbps 85 kbps 146 kbps
Here is an screenshot (in red, the 10% highest value for each codec; in yellow the 10% lowest value for all codec — the three grey lines are the mono discs).
(https://zupimages.net/up/20/24/gjow.png) (https://zupimages.net/viewer.php?id=20/24/gjow.png)
Was USAC at 22Khz sampling rate? If so, how does Opus 22Khz compare to 22Khz USAC?
I don't get it. Isn't Opus always 48kHz?
Also it lacks support in vlc and foobar mobile.
I didn't want to say it was a problem, 64 kbps is a bit too low like you said.
To me the problem is the low sample rate. Exhale quality is excellent for example in Bastille Pompeii at 64 kbps. But 32 khz sample rate makes the vocals sounds bad. Also it lacks support in vlc and foobar mobile.
Resampling is maybe an answer to the quality issue and not the real problem.
My guess is that exhale begins to starve at some point which is lower than the starvation point for MP3 (which is ~120 kbps) or AAC. Maybe 64 kbps is too low for exhale. Resampling could therefore increase quality on many samples (and lower it on others).
But I must say that I would be curious to check how exhale would sound without resampling at mode 1.
"Apple's AAC encoder doesn't allow VBR with HEAAC."
AAC-HE Encoder, CVBR 64kbps, Quality 96
Apple's encoder only allows CVBR, and I was rather looking for TVBR.
Here is the comparison between FDKAAC HE VBR and iTunes AAC HE CVBR:
(https://zupimages.net/up/20/24/9obq.png)
the same, data sorted from min to max:
(https://zupimages.net/up/20/24/yf1k.png)
With iTunes CVBR: on 91 CD, 72 end with 66 kbps. Nine CD are 67 kbps and the four highest bitrate are 68 kbps… The three mono files are 58 kbps. The lowest stereo is 60 kbps. There's almost no variation here.
But all other competitors and anchors are truly VBR. So I don't think it would be a good idea to replace a true VBR encoder with another one which offers on the very best a constraint VBR mode that seems very close to CBR/ABR. At least not in this test and not without some evidence that iTunes HE-AAC would sound better.
by the way, this is a great reason to compare qaac tvbr lc/cvbr he, fdk lc/he/he2, faac tns/notns/pns0..10.
Yes, comparing various AAC implementation is something I'd like to do for years.
Was USAC at 22Khz sampling rate? If so, how does Opus 22Khz compare to 22Khz USAC?
No, USAC (exhale 1.0.4 mode 1) is 32000 Hz in this test. The low anchor (MP3 at 64 kbps) is 22050 Hz.
As kode54 says, Opus resamples everything to 48000 Hz before encoding, so comparison is either impossible or pointless (maybe both ;) ).
I wouldn't say impossible/pointless. It isn't really an apples to apples comparison.
Give the Opus encoder less information to work with by resampling the input files to 32000 Hz. Maybe the Opus encoder is wasting bits on frequencies that the USAC encoder doesn't even have to deal with.
LithosZA,
Opus --bitrate 64 spends 0.1-0.2 kbps for frequencies higher than 15.6 kHz. The decision to keep HF was taken by developers long time ago and for a really good reason. 32 kHz won't benefit Opus@64k in any way.
Also if someone tests codec it's best practices just go with what developers suggest ( read default).
I wouldn't say impossible/pointless. It isn't really an apples to apples comparison.
Give the Opus encoder less information to work with by resampling the input files to 32000 Hz. Maybe the Opus encoder is wasting bits on frequencies that the USAC encoder doesn't even have to deal with.
First, you must take into account that resampling to 32 KHz has a negative consequence on temporal resolution. It can audibly increase smearing and pre-echo.
An alternative would be lowpassing to 16 KHz without resampling to 32KHz.
But Opus is a mature format. Tests have been done long time ago to ensure that it keeping higher frequencies don't audibly affect sound quality. I'm not technician but I guess Opus has some advanced techniques to code efficiently HF contents at low bitrate [Edit: IgorC already answered this more precisely]. I'm pretty confident that sound quality can not enhanced that way and that developers already explored that path long time ago.
First, you must take into account that resampling to 32 KHz has a negative consequence on temporal resolution. It can audibly increase smearing and pre-echo.
That would be true when signals are coded with variable Fs AND fixed-sized MDCT.
In case of opus, 32kHz input is just resampled to 48kHz... so, I wouldn't say temporal resolution degrades by that.
But Opus is a mature format. Tests have been done long time ago to ensure that it keeping higher frequencies don't audibly affect sound quality.
I agree.
I've noticed when Opus fails under <128kbps or from a killer sample, It had the same puffy noise. With quiet ambient that just synth tones/sine waves the bit rate can bloat hard 96k = 145, 128k = 175, 160k = 255. xHE AAC with exhale doesn't have those issues.