Author Topic: Audio encoding - New and improved!  (Read 4297 times)

Online scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,603
    • Facebook Me
Audio encoding - New and improved!
« on: Wednesday, February 06, 2008, 03:26:07 PM »
Well, many of you are familiar with my EAC + LAME guide, which described how to generate very high quality VBR MP3 files.

I still feel that MP3 is a completely viable format and is still competitive with modern lossy codecs at high bitrates.  However, times have changed.  Support for the AAC codec is much more widespread than it was a couple years ago.  Hard drive space has increased a whole lot.  So I have moved on from MP3 to both the AAC lossy format and TAK lossless format.

Until recently, it wasn't an easy choice to decide to adopt the AAC format.  The two main AAC encoders are iTunes and Nero.  Nero was the superior encoder in most respects, especially because it supported AAC-HE.  However AAC files encoded with the Nero encoder did not work in iTunes or on the iPod unless you stripped the AAC audio stream out of its MP4 container and then reapplied the MP4 container with a special tool.  Tagging was also an issue as there was no standard tag defined and iTunes used its own tag that nothing else supported, and everything else that could create AAC files could not apply iTunes tags so if you imported the file into iTunes (if you even could), you would have to manually tag each file one-by-one.

But now the Nero AAC files in iTunes issue does not exist anymore after a new iTunes version and the tag compatibility problems have likewise vanished:  everything supports iTunes tags now.  The only real remaining issue is that iTunes does not support AAC-HE; it cannot play the HE part.  So that means that a very low bitrate AAC file encoded with Nero that sounds great normally in other players will sound not so great in iTunes or on the iPod, though it will still sound a shit-ton better than a low-bitrate MP3.  Basically all this means is that if you use iTunes and/or the iPod as your primary players, don't encode at very low bitrates.

Anyway, all I'm saying is that AAC has come a long way in the past couple of years and I now endorse it, specifically the Nero encoder although iTunes is okay.

I still use EAC, though now it's up to version 0.99pb3.  I also decided that since I store all my music on my file server and I have a 500 GB drive with only like 50 GB used that I would start using AAC at a lower bitrate like ~128kbps VBR and start archiving my music.  That is to say keep a losslessly compressed copy, so that I can restore to the original WAV file if a future lossy codec comes out that blows AAC out of the water or something.

There is a new promising lossless codec called TAK that seems to be gaining some steam.  FLAC is the most popular lossless codec, but it actually isn't very good at compression.  I think it generally only compresses to about 75% of the original size.  There are other lossless formats like Wavepak and Monkey's Audio that can compress a file to around 50% - 60% of the original size.  FLACs advantage is that it compresses and especially decompresses quickly, making it well suited as a playable format.  Well TAK is like a combination of Monkey's Audio and FLAC.  It compresses well and also compresses and decompresses quickly.

Well if you've ever worked with just about any ripper/encoder combo there is, you might be thinking that encoding the same tracks to two formats is kind of time and labor intensive since you'd have to set up the ripper/encoder for one type of encoding, rip it, then set it up for the other type and rip it again.  Well, I have located a command line program called Mareo that solves this problem entirely.

Basically I set up Mareo as the encoder for EAC.  Then I set up the Mareo config file to tell it what I want to happen when it receives the WAV file and track information from EAC (in my case, I told it to encode using the Nero AAC encoder, tag the resulting file, then encode again to TAK and apply a APEv2 tag to it).  You only rip once, and then Mareo handles passing all the relevant parameters and track information to the two encoders.

It's some pretty cool stuff.  Maybe sometime soon I'll come up with some sort of guide for this (I had to go to like 10 websites to figure it all out).  In the meantime if it's something that interests you, let me know and I'll get you going.

Offline Antares

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,179
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #1 on: Thursday, February 07, 2008, 01:17:15 AM »
I got an external hard drive for christmas, so I've had the idea in the back of my head to put all my music on it and try to integrate some a home theatre/music system to include my TV.  I haven't really gone forward with anything yet but I've always thought it would be cool to have all my home media systems integrated, and it seems like now it would be possible without being ridiculously expensive.

Online scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,603
    • Facebook Me
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #2 on: Thursday, February 07, 2008, 08:48:27 AM »
Lots of new receivers have connections for just that sort of thing.  I'm not sure if you can just plug in a USB hard drive full of music, but it wouldn't surprise me.  My old roommate had an Onkyo that had an Ethernet connection and software that let you share music on a PC with the Onkyo.

A lower-tech, less integrated method could be to get a miniplug-to-RCA wire, plug the miniplug into a laptop's headphone or external speaker jack, plug the RCA connections into a set of inputs on a receiver, and then plug the hard drive into the laptop.

You'd have to work with the laptop to play the musc and whatnot, but it's an option.  I did that for a party once (well except I had my music on my file server instead of an external drive).

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #3 on: Thursday, February 07, 2008, 09:12:16 AM »
My problem with AACs is that, for better or worse, the glue that holds all my music together is Windows Media Player.  WMP knows where all of it is (and it's scattered across multiple folders and drives) and it has all the metadata worked out.  It's all organized by artists, albums, genres, and so forth.  Even if WMP can be forced to play AAC via a codec/filter, it's not going to know how to deal with the AAC tags, and so they won't be integrated into the metadata.  I would have to find a player that can deal with organization as well as WMP, and which can handle MP3s and AACs (and hopefully anything else around the corner, because standards are shorter-lived now than ever) and then go through the long process of adding all my music to it.  Winamp 2 is not it.  The library functionality in Winamp leaves much to be desired.  Plus I honestly don't want to tackle something this tedious any time soon.

I do get a few AACs every so often, one way or another.  Eventually, I will have to deal with the problem.

Online scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,603
    • Facebook Me
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #4 on: Thursday, February 07, 2008, 11:29:40 AM »
Wow WMP doesn't handle AAC?  That's odd.  I guess it's just Microsoft clinging to WMA.

Edit:  Maybe you could try out the Zune software?  It has a media library and supports AAC.
« Last Edit: Thursday, February 07, 2008, 03:37:54 PM by scottws »

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #5 on: Thursday, February 07, 2008, 10:11:26 PM »
Oh, it does play AAC files.  It just can't do anything with them other than play them.  I even have to force it to accept the extension, and I have to override the file types it shows in the "Open" dialog box.  The codec/filter handles the playback, but the program is flying blind.

Edit:  What do you think of this AAC FAQ page?

Edit 2:  Heh.  The Haali media splitter and ffdshow are showing as active as I play a tune I encoded nearly 2 years ago, I forget exactly how.  I think I may have used Nero.  I wanted to test the PSP's new AAC support.  It's 16 MB for 8:49 play time, so I didn't go for low bitrate.  Extension is M4A.  Sounds very nice.  The source is one of my audio CDs.

Online scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,603
    • Facebook Me
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #6 on: Friday, February 08, 2008, 09:59:08 AM »
AAC isn't really truly much (any?) better than MP3 at high bitrates.  Its strengths are middle and especially low bitrates, crushing MP3 and MPC, and outshining WMA.  I think it's a little better than Ogg Vorbis too, especially at very low bitrates.

Whereas music <160 kbps had sort of a stigma with MP3, I would say such a stigma only exists with AAC <64 kpbs.  Although as a test I encoded something at 32 kpbs and it still sounded pretty good (in Winamp... sounded like crap in iTunes because of the lack of -HE support).

That FAQ page is pretty good.  I get most of my information from Hydrogen Audio.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #7 on: Friday, February 08, 2008, 10:31:03 AM »
OK, so really, EAC/LAME ripping/encoding to optimum VBR parameters is fine, even in comparison to AAC.  As long as MP3 doesn't get abandoned, it's not going to be inferior until you need to squeeze more tracks into a space-limited device.  I realize iTunes is a powerful force now, and so AAC may end up becoming the more popular format.  But I don't need to re-rip and reencode my whole music collection.  I will eventually need to find a solution that integrates all my music and its tags into a single database, including AAC, and hopefully future formats.

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,940
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #8 on: Friday, February 08, 2008, 10:55:32 AM »
AAC works great for streaming. One of the streaming sites I had visited started using AAC (or AAC+, I forget) and it sounded great even on my slow connection, especially compared to how dialup speed MP3 streams sound.

Online scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,603
    • Facebook Me
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #9 on: Friday, February 08, 2008, 01:50:27 PM »
OK, so really, EAC/LAME ripping/encoding to optimum VBR parameters is fine, even in comparison to AAC.  As long as MP3 doesn't get abandoned, it's not going to be inferior until you need to squeeze more tracks into a space-limited device.
Essentially, yes.  Are you still using --alt-preset standard?  If so, I sugget moving to LAME v3.97 and use -V 3 --vbr-new.  It's way faster, a little smaller (~175kbps vs. ~192kbps) and supposedly results in no loss in CD transparency vs. --alt-preset standard.

I realize iTunes is a powerful force now, and so AAC may end up becoming the more popular format.  But I don't need to re-rip and reencode my whole music collection.
I don't plan to re-rip my collection, at least very soon.  Currently I'm employing this strategy only going forward.  In the future, I technically won't need to re-rip since I'll have the lossless TAK files (and as we all know, the transfer from optical disk is by far the slowest part).

However, my 8GB Nano is already at capacity, so I suppose it could benefit from using smaller files and I may re-rip my collection yet.  But not until I get a Disc Doctor or something.  I have several CDs I know that either will not rip at all or take forever.

Quote
I will eventually need to find a solution that integrates all my music and its tags into a single database, including AAC, and hopefully future formats.
Well foobar2000 is a good bet.  It supports pretty much everything under the sun.  I'm sure you wouldn't like it though.

Did you check out Zune?

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #10 on: Friday, February 08, 2008, 03:49:51 PM »
The site is being a bitch about losing connection.  Anyway, yes, I'm still using alt-preset standard.  I had not heard about the new version or method.  (Now I have.)  I think I checked out foobar2000 once, but for some reason, I guess it didn't impress me.  (Otherwise I'd be using it, kind of like VLC player stuck with me right away, because of its clear utility.)   Are you saying there's Zune player software out there that's relevant even without a Zune?  I want to see that.

Online scottws

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6,603
    • Facebook Me
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #11 on: Friday, February 08, 2008, 04:40:41 PM »
The site is being a bitch about losing connection.
Someone else said that, but I've only seen it myself once.  It was really slow earlier today.  I remember seeing something like "Page created in 58+ seconds with 11 queries" when loading the index.  Obviously that is abnormally long.  It has to be something to do with GoDaddy's database server.

Anyway, I think I checked out foobar2000 once, but for some reason, I guess it didn't impress me.  (Otherwise I'd be using it, kind of like VLC player stuck with me right away, because of its clear utility.)
A lot of people really like it, but I just use it for tagging.  It's default interface is horrible and boring and ugly and useless.  You can alter it to all kinds of crazy stuff, but it's not trivial at all.

I only mentioned it because you said you desired a player that could handle everything, including possible future formats (which is why I find that you use WMP odd).  What don't you like about Winamp's library?  What does WMP's library do that Winamp doesn't  This is an honest question.  I don't use WMP.

Are you saying there's Zune player software out there that's relevant even without a Zune?  I want to see that.
Yes.

Offline idolminds

  • ZOMG!
  • Administrator
  • Forum god
  • *
  • Posts: 11,940
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #12 on: Friday, February 08, 2008, 05:32:04 PM »
Actually, the new version of foobar has more built in and has several presets for UIs. One is laid out pretty much exactly how I had my previous version.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #13 on: Monday, July 20, 2009, 10:11:14 AM »
Quote
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 365 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Aww . . but this really does belong in here.   :-\

. . . Anyway, yes, I'm still using alt-preset standard.  I had not heard about the new version or method.  (Now I have.)  . . .

Since I lost all my installations when my system drive crashed, I ended up updating both EAC and LAME.  I'm using LAME 3.98.2 now.  The -V 2 option is roughly equivalent to the old -alt-preset standard.  I had recently ripped Bocelli's Sogno album into the old encoder (and old vbr engine) at alt-preset standard.  I re-ripped it at V 2 with the new one (and new vbr engine) and I was surprised to hear a definite improvement in vocal clarity.  I used "'O Mare e Tu", which features Portuguese singer Dulce Pontes, to compare.  (My favorite track by far.)  It wasn't a double-blind test, so it's not scientific, but the difference seems too obvious to have any real doubts.  The new encode of this track is slightly larger than the old: 5712 KB vs 5489 KB.  But some tracks actually came out a bit smaller with the new engine.

This page is very informative about the current state of LAME.  EAC supports FLAC natively now too.  I have yet to try that.

Edit:
. . . I sugget moving to LAME v3.97 and use -V 3 --vbr-new.  It's way faster, a little smaller (~175kbps vs. ~192kbps) and supposedly results in no loss in CD transparency vs. --alt-preset standard.

Hmm.  This may be a good option for a portable, if I ever get one that actually works.

Offline Cools!

  • Administrator
  • Veteran
  • *
  • Posts: 1,628
  • Let's burn.
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #14 on: Thursday, July 23, 2009, 09:08:01 PM »
I'm still encoding to MP3 (CBR 320) for most and FLAC for classical. MP3 is still far more supported. For example, I often listen to music on my pro audio recorder (SoundDevices 722) that I use for work and it has no support for AAC, but does for FLAC and MP3.

Offline Cobra951

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8,934
Re: Audio encoding - New and improved!
« Reply #15 on: Friday, July 24, 2009, 10:56:18 AM »
Yes, MP3 is still the universal format.  I'm surprised that with the runaway popularity of iPods and iTunes, AAC is still not supported just as well.