Talk:MPEG-4 Part 3: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
As far as I can tell, iTunes does support aacPlus, at least in the latest Mac OS X version. I downloaded the samples that made up the listening test at [[http://www.mp3-tech.org/tests/aac_48/results.html]], and after muxing the raw .aac files (which were the aacPlus encodes, v1 and v2 I believe) into .mp4, iTunes played all the aacPlus samples fine. In fact, the only AAC samples from that test it couldn't play were the Nero HE-AAC v2 samples. Or does this section mean that iTunes doesn't actually do SBR, and decodes them as LC? That's something I have no idea about - the samples sound the same to me in VLC. [[User:Dicey|Dicey]] 20:59 24 April 2006 (UTC) |
As far as I can tell, iTunes does support aacPlus, at least in the latest Mac OS X version. I downloaded the samples that made up the listening test at [[http://www.mp3-tech.org/tests/aac_48/results.html]], and after muxing the raw .aac files (which were the aacPlus encodes, v1 and v2 I believe) into .mp4, iTunes played all the aacPlus samples fine. In fact, the only AAC samples from that test it couldn't play were the Nero HE-AAC v2 samples. Or does this section mean that iTunes doesn't actually do SBR, and decodes them as LC? That's something I have no idea about - the samples sound the same to me in VLC. [[User:Dicey|Dicey]] 20:59 24 April 2006 (UTC) |
||
: You will only hear the LC-AAC part. HE-AAC and HE-AACv2 are backwards compatible. Seems iTunes is buggy if it fails to play the Nero files. |
: You will only hear the LC-AAC part. HE-AAC and HE-AACv2 are backwards compatible. Seems iTunes is buggy if it fails to play the Nero files. |
||
=== eAAC+ not mentioned === |
|||
Enhaced AAC+ is not mentioned. At least in the GSM world the name eAAC+ is used often. It means AAC+ v2, that is AAC+SBR+PS (in contrast to AAC+ v1, which is only AAC+SBR). Also this looks like a useful link : http://www.codingtechnologies.com/products/aacPlus.htm |
|||
xerces8 |
|||
--[[User:213.253.102.145|213.253.102.145]] 08:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 08:01, 1 September 2006
What does "Bifrication" mean? It's in the heading "Bifrication in the AAC technical standard" Tompagenet 5 July 2005 12:17 (UTC)
- Google returns only 111(!) results for "Bifrication". I guess 'Bifrication' is surely wrong to use here. --GrAndrew 15:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- It should perhaps be "bifurcation" instead?
Also, can someone please explain the use of CBR with AAC vs VBR AAC and present what programs (Nero is the only one I think) do VBR?--Bennmann 20:41, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 | This article may be too technical for most readers to understand. |
Article is very hard to understand. Eagle (talk) (desk) 16:58, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
- Can you please point out exact paragraphs to work on? I find this article rather exhaustive. Except for 'Bifrication' clause. --GrAndrew 15:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, iTunes does support aacPlus, at least in the latest Mac OS X version. I downloaded the samples that made up the listening test at [[1]], and after muxing the raw .aac files (which were the aacPlus encodes, v1 and v2 I believe) into .mp4, iTunes played all the aacPlus samples fine. In fact, the only AAC samples from that test it couldn't play were the Nero HE-AAC v2 samples. Or does this section mean that iTunes doesn't actually do SBR, and decodes them as LC? That's something I have no idea about - the samples sound the same to me in VLC. Dicey 20:59 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- You will only hear the LC-AAC part. HE-AAC and HE-AACv2 are backwards compatible. Seems iTunes is buggy if it fails to play the Nero files.
eAAC+ not mentioned
Enhaced AAC+ is not mentioned. At least in the GSM world the name eAAC+ is used often. It means AAC+ v2, that is AAC+SBR+PS (in contrast to AAC+ v1, which is only AAC+SBR). Also this looks like a useful link : http://www.codingtechnologies.com/products/aacPlus.htm
xerces8