http://mediacoder.sourceforge.net/
No explanation needed



-kwag

I just finished encoding a small 24 second sample, encoded with MediaCoder, using CT AAC+ encoder.
Here is the lossless FLAC file: http://www.mytempdir.com/510280 weighting ~2MB
And here is the encoded sample: http://www.mytempdir.com/510283 weighting at only 74KB, encoded at 24Kbps.
Feel free to do an ABX test and see (if you hear!) the differences
I did with my regular PC speakers, and I really can't tell the difference (or maybe I'm too tired )
I'm sure with headphones there will be, but I have not heard any other current CODEC in the world that approaches that quality at that low bitrate.
Feedback always welcome

-kwag

Hey Karl .
That MediaCoder sure looks nice.
Although it could be smaller.
I am currently downloading it and it says 12MB .
Nevertheless I heard your FLAC agains your AAC+ test clips and I also didn't find any differencies at all.
I'll try with other sources and I'll let you know later .
Cheers

__________________
Rui

Perhaps I shouldn't be butting in when I know nothing about the encodng processes, but I have to say that to my amateur ears the .flac version sounds much better. Much richer sound even from my cheap desktop speakers.

- Icarus

Hi Icarus,

Try a blind ABX test with Foobar, and see how your results come out
You might also want to encode the FLAC sample at 48Kbps, and then see if you hear any differences
At 24Kbps, it's supposed to be FM+ quality. Not CD quality. But it still sounds damn good
The parameters I used with MediaCoder were the following:

So just change the bitrate to 48Kbps and then do a blind ABX test.

-kwag

I stand corrected... I was first playing them both with winamp, where flac sounded better. With Foobar they both sound about the same.

Cheers,
Icarus

Why would anyone still be using WinAmp anyway .
Just kiddin' of course

__________________
Rui

I just finished doing an earphones test with both of these CODECS, and I swear that with the 3GPP AAC+ V2 CODEC, I'm having a VERY hard time picking out differences between a FLAC and a 3GPP 32Kbps encode.
With the CT AAC+ V2, I was able to hear several differences, but with 3GPP it's almost identical to source. I'm missing a lot on the ABX test with this CODEC
If this is the case, then for sure CT AAC+ V2 at 48Kbps is truly CD quality.
Can anyone else confirm this, and if someone CAN hear differences, please post the uncompressed clip so that many of us can make comparisons.
I will NOT take a "I can hear differences" for granted, without a clip to duplicate and reproduce the comment
Just encode some small complex music to FLAC (or WAV if you don't care about space), and then encode with 3GPP at 32Kbps and make an ABX test with foobar.

Edit: I think, for the time being, I'm settling for this encoder (3GPP) at 32Kbps for all my portable audio needs, as it's very close to an audio CD in quality

-kwag

What mean ABX ?

It's a component for blind testing of two sources.
http://www.foobar2000.org/components.html#foo_abx


-kwag

@Kwag,

Found these presets for Foobar2000 and wondered if you are using any
to control the equalizer settings

http://sjeng.org/ftp/fb2k/eq_presets.zip

-BP

Thanks BP
I just added them to my Foobar directory.
I didn't have any equalizer presets in use

-kwag

All i got to say is thanks for finding this program. I got over 25 gigs of music. And to reduce space for archiving onto dvd is awesome. I can manage to lose all my programs. But losing my music that i have collected for over 6 years. Would just plain suck. So once again thanks kwag and kvcd. If i wouldnt have found this place i would be doing standard vcds or dvds by now and simple 160 kps mp3s. What a loser i would be without this place.

__________________
Eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die

Thanks heyitsme

BTW, today, I have been encoding most of my FLAC collection to aacPlus with this program (using the 3GPP encoder now for over 4 hours), and I just finished a total of 14 CDs, and the total file size adds up to 159MB
It's just incredible
I still have quite a way to go to fill my 256MB SD card, that will go in my PocketPC with TCPMP player
I'm guessing that the total CDs will be about 20, so basically I have multiplied my capacity X4 or X5 times what I could have achieved with MP3s.
And still, and MP3 at 128Kbps I can hear warbled audio on high frequencies, and I can not hear these artifacts with aacPlus at 32Kbps
Before, I was encoding with LAME with "-V 6 --vbr-new", and that was an average bitrate of around 130 to 150Kbps, so go figure how much the savings is now, with equal (or better!) audio quality

-kwag

@all,

I have foobar2000 v0.8.3 special which is suppose to include DSP
crossfader, but it's missing. I checked the foobar plugin list and still no
crossfader. Does anyone have a link or foo_dsp_crossfader.dll file.

Thanks

-BP

I've downloaded some FLACs from this post:

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...r&f=40&t=40022

I tried "you can't do that" (Beatles) encoded with mediacoder, 3gp @ 48kbps.

I ABX'ed it 9/10.

You're right GFR
I tried it too, and I also was able to distinguish differences. So I guess AAC+ CD quality is also a marketing fallacy
I wonder if there's such thing as "Transparency" with AAC+, as we all know that with LAME at ~160Kbps+ there is transparency

-kwag

Well, not even 160Kbps needed with LAME
I just tried LAME with "-V 6 --vbr-new", and audio is transparent with my regular desktop speakers.
With the same speakers, I can still pick out small differences with AAC+ at 64Kbps, so I guess aac+ is great for space savings, but not really for highest (purest) quality.
LAME with "-V 6--vbr-new" is also good for portable players, but not as good at aacPlus (as far as file size)
But I guess if you really want transparent audio, then aacPlus is *NOT* the way to go

@GFR

Try that "Beatles" sample encoded with Lame "-V 6--vbr-new" and let me know
You definitely have a better ear than me

-kwag

I'll try it with LAME too.

I tried another sample from that link I posted, the "waiting.flac". That's Green Day. It starts with the singer unaccompanied singing with "lots of ethusiasm" So at the end of each phrase there's those breathing noises. OK you can say it's bad singing technique and that in a Frank Sinatra recording you would never hear that much breathing But it's not Sinatra, it's punk (or alternative or whatever you wanna call it) and these noises do fit in and give the song a "nervous" feel that it's part of the song. Now... the aac@48kbps totally ruined those breath noises! It's not even necessary to ABX that.