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: Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality? (Read 5235 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Sorry about a bit n00b question - I'm no big expert in AAC / MP4 yet, just
practising with it because i know it'll be the final winner after all mp3's
limitations both in quality vs. filesizes! (it already is..)

So i have to make a query for You Experts here !

- I downloaded the Poikosoft's latest Easy CD-DA Extractor v6.2 buid 1 and
found out (for a happy surprice) that it now supports AAC (MP4, M4A) Ripping and File Converting.
- So i ripped some CD's (experimentally) to Wavs there and put them to Audio File Converter's list and choosed a preset called ~96 kbps".

-I opened the files i had encoded with Winamp v5 and found out, that it did tagging just fine and the average bitrate was about 100 kbps in the properties...(Nero AAC show me ~95 kbps at the same setting with 96 / HE)

- OK - That's all fine, but i was left to wonder, what preset the app uses, because there's just one drop-down combo for selecting the ~xx kbps (I think it's VBR) bitrates from 32 to 192 kbps.

- But there is no ability to decide, whether one wants HE / LC / MAIN preset, set quality Factor, CBR or VBR choise, no way to put any "Lowpass Audio @" info,  volume scaling / resample / downmix etc. as good encoders do have.

In a few words : all i can select is the average bitrate and i want to know :

1. Do anyone of You know, what kind of quality it produces / what are those defaults ?
2. Is there a tool for analyzing AAC-files to get the facts out by myself? (except listening)
(3. I tried to listen the output vs. Nero AAC and did not hear much difference,  maybe Ahead's was a bit better...)

I have tried to wakie up Jukka Poikolainen from Poikosoft with direct E-mails,  because i own the licence for that app, but he has not answered to my query(s) yet, so i decided to ask You ppl around here..!
(i think / am sure i can get faster answer(s) here ...)

Looking forwards ...

Regards : Mathias M.

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #1 –
The AAC encoder Easy CD-DA Extractor uses is FAAC. A relatively recent test showed that it is (or at least, used to be) significantly worse than the other AAC encoders.

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #2 –
Quote
The AAC encoder Easy CD-DA Extractor uses is FAAC. A relatively recent test showed that it is (or at least, used to be) significantly worse than the other AAC encoders.


I was a bit afraid of that this is the case and so it was - and how they (faac developers) were (and still are) doing hard work do get to winners and just vice versa seems to be happened (according to that pages bunch of tests at 128 kbps !)

I cannot figure out why QT is so damn well winner at (almost) all results, but no wonder - they have had all the time (AND money) on their side when making that kinda "Apple Music Standard" for a long time. And now finally we PC-users can encode AAC with that one since iTunes v4.1.1.54...

I Think after reading those facts to put my iTunes to make the AAC-encodes (if the PC-version is equal to Mac's, and i think it is - just portabled the sources to Intel platform and HW-level to Windows HAL [ at NT4/2K/XP/2K3 ] - iTunesService & iPodService)...

I knew all of the other encoders but the name "Sor" (with quite a good quality) was new too me - is it just a shortie of something that i will regognice immediately after seeing the whole word / what app uses it most...?

P.S. I just checked the version of ecddax's aac.dll and it's dated 1'st of this month with version 5.1.0.0 and the "Original File name" field really did show me "faac.dll" so now i'm convinced. Still if he wants to stick with Faac / Faad i would like to get those customizable presets to be saved and loaded as Faac does inherit, it's not just Bitrate / Speed oriented as this implementation.

At every point while considering LAME the app is a "Super", because of the many preset / Lame configurator / ability to put latest (or shall we say most reliable) Lame.exe to app's dir and batch-run it externally if wanted with whatever params (make wavs with main and mp3's at background lame CMD's [ --quiet to not see all the hassle ]...)

Thanks for the advice a Lot !!!

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #3 –
OK - I had now mail from Jukka P. too and am happy to know, that he'll maybe implement some other AAC-encoder for the Easy CD-Da Extractor and making more to select than just that one bitrate-combo (also he'll wait a bit to see how the Faac-project is evolving with quality vs. Ahead and Psytel... [ QT exclusived ]) !

I was telling him about Alexander Lerch's "Dicas Compaact!" and it's open sources and gave him the contact info for Alex. (was that ok?)

That is because i have downloaded his latest versions 1.03 and now 1.04 of the "frontend" and made some "blind test" with it vs. Nero Encoder and found out 2 facts :
1. It sounds much better at 80 kbps HE AND 128 kbps LC profiles
2. It has more to set up than Nero's has - and the ability to save / load presets.

Maybe some day he'll make it possible to batch-encode wavs / CD's and make tagging / cddb-querys possible to get it as a "real frontend" for AAC-oriented "Extractor" !

In the meanwhile i eagerly wait for Jukka's answer, because i really do like his app as LAME-part, possibility to copy CP CD's and the Multiconversion Tab's many formats...
(Just the AAC's future is bothering me whilst all other is OK in the App now!)

I was left to wonder whether there's a tool available for "measuring" the AAC quality and i found out that FooBar is what i have and it shows most of the info, but not all (important parts)...

If someone do have a link for that kinda tool / foobar-plugin etc i would be gracefull to get the info! Thanks already ...

Regards : Mathias !

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #4 –
Quote
I was left to wonder whether there's a tool available for "measuring" the AAC quality and i found out that FooBar is what i have and it shows most of the info, but not all (important parts)...

So what info do you consider the important parts of measuring quality? As far as I know Foobar already provides that, and it is called playback.

Quote
If someone do have a link for that kinda tool / foobar-plugin etc i would be gracefull to get the info! Thanks already ...

IIRC foobar comes with an ABX plugin to do a listening test.

Menno

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #5 –
Quote
I was left to wonder whether there's a tool available for "measuring" the AAC quality and i found out that FooBar is what i have and it shows most of the info, but not all (important parts)


This is not much bothering me anymore after i read all the info's and found here a few more links to compare those facts and i do have quite a sensitive ears to tell me the rest (With SB Auduigy II Platinum Pro with the latest (EAX4) drivers found through validated news.

I'm just a bit sensiteve just now, because i'm considering to put all my hundred's of CD's to AAC format and i want to make them as good quality as possible with speed / easy vs. time. So at that point the encoder quality is #1 and next comes it's speed when doing the encoding using same VBR preset(s) - mostly Transparency to up with about 128 to 160 kbps base ...
(not needing any "Insane" presets)

Just now i wait a bit and see what happens to Faac Encoder and Ahead's Encoder at near future (say at the end of this Y) and then study whether they will be ~ equally comparable to each others...

Or then i relay with iTunes v4.1.1.54 (or next release(s) ) and do the work with it's QT-Encoder .. ;-)
(Kidding with that one...)

Quote
IIRC foobar comes with an ABX plugin to do a listening test ...

Hey, that sounds good - where to find that one...?

Regards : Mathias M.

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #6 –
Quote
Quote
IIRC foobar comes with an ABX plugin to do a listening test ...

Hey, that sounds good - where to find that one...?

Regards : Mathias M.

Select 2 files, and right-click them, some ABX... menu item should show up.

Menno

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #7 –
Quote
Select 2 files, and right-click them, some ABX... menu item should show up.

OK - just tested with Foobar and works fine!! Thankx!

Foobar really do show some more nfo than winamp's plugin does, like the tool (=The main App that has produced the files), average bitrate, aac frofile (in ecddax case it's Faad AAC LC ~96), channels and the num. of samples.

+ The ABX...

I'm done for now : Foobar & "The Ears" are enough for me for now on ...

Just one Q : i can select (with CBR ~96) both Low Complexity AND High Efficiensy at Nero's AAC-Plugin v2.5.6.3 dated 20.8.03, so which one should be used in this "Edge-Case" for better output?
(And do i have the latest AAC.Dll - my Nero is v6.0.0.23 ?)

(I know that LC must be used at upper bitrates (Nero won't allow at upper to even select other) and HE is best for 80 kbps and lower kbps's)

Now just trust - This (should) be my last question at this thread...

Mathias

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #8 –
Are you sure it is possible to select both? Maybe you can select it, but I think at 96 kbps, the file will always be encoded with LC. That's probably also the best choice for most files.

Menno

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #9 –
Quote
Are you sure it is possible to select both? Maybe you can select it, but I think at 96 kbps, the file will always be encoded with LC. That's probably also the best choice for most files.

I made two files with Nero at 96 kbps CBR Preset (LC & HE) from same Wav source :
(50 Cent - High All The Time (LC).mp4 and 50 Cent - High All The Time (HC).mp4

=====================
This is the Foobars results for LC :
=====================
bitrate = 96
channels = 2
samplerate = 32000
aac_profile = AAC LC
codec = AAC
tool = Nero AAC Codec 2.5.8.2
8620320 samples @ 32000Hz

=============
This is same with HE
=============
bitrate = 96
channels = 2
samplerate = 44100
aac_profile = AAC HE
codec = AAC+SBR
tool = Nero AAC Codec 2.5.8.2
11880038 samples @ 44100Hz
=====================

Most here i wonder the Samplerate & bitrate vs. samples -> 32 kHz - 44.1 kHz
AND the Codec Info at HE : AAC+SBR !!! (more samples at 44.100 ?)

Is Foobar OK here and what does the +SBR make to the output ... ?
(The source is 44 kHz PCM Wav)

//EDIT : The version number here was gotten from Nero "aacenc32.dll" encoder / decoder at audioplugins folder (not from Aac.dll )...

Mathias

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #10 –
Quote
Most here i wonder the Samplerate & bitrate vs. samples -> 32 kHz - 44.1 kHz
AND the Codec Info at HE : AAC+SBR !!! (more samples at 44.100 ?)

(8620320 samples) / (32000 samples/second) = 269,39 seconds
(11880038 samples) / (44100 samples/second) = 269,39 seconds

Nothing strange with this...
 

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #11 –
Quote
(8620320 samples) / (32000 samples/second) = 269,39 seconds
(11880038 samples) / (44100 samples/second) = 269,39 seconds
Nothing strange with this...

Okay Okay - i was confused in a hurry and counted them vice versa - NOP anymore with that one !

The original question relayed with the Ahead's CBR preset with ability to choose HE & LC at the "edge" bitrate @ 96 kbps and i just put those Foobar results visible to point out that we really at that bitrate can choose both LC and HE ..!
(Instead of it just showing that we would...)

Of cource LC produces better results at 96k - a small listening test with foobar proved it to me immediately : at 96 HE i could hear a bit distortion here and there and some "mumble" at Bass-frequencies, while the LC file sounded really OK ! )
(Although my sample - 50 Cent's Hip-Hop was not a good choice for the test  )

Summa Summarum : Aheads Aac.dll seems not to make the encoding, instead the aacenc32.dll (v2.5.8.2 dated 04.11.2003 which came with the Nero's Latest update v6.0.0.23) !

I'm spoken - ugh (maybe NOW this thread is gone enough merry's... ;-)

Mathias

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #12 –
Cross post deleted.
"To understand me, you'll have to swallow a world." Or maybe your words.

Easy CD-Da Extractors AAC-plugin quality?

Reply #13 –
Quote
Cross post deleted.

OK - no more "Crosses" by me...

Mathias