Old 19th December 2013, 14:56   #1
CharmingNathan
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 26
.mp3 or .aac?

Hi,

I've had a conversation today with someone who knows a lot more about Internet Radio than I do (I know, not hard!), and they heavily recommended using ..aac over .mp3 format.

I'd appreciate views on this especially as my system uses .mp3 at present. Would it just be a case of converting to .aac if this is a better format for streaming? If so, would anyone recommend any particular converter?

Thanking you in anticipation!

Nathan.
CharmingNathan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2013, 18:11   #2
CJ_Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Perth Australia
Posts: 167
This may be of interest to you:
http://thisweekinradiotech.com/twirt...ogonowski.html
CJ_Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th December 2013, 18:44   #3
ujay
Forum King
 
ujay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: London
Posts: 6,072
Hi Nathan,

I'm just a listener, and would say that aac is definitely better at low bitrates.
If you're already broadcasting at 128kbps then there's not so much to choose between the two.

I think I'm right in saying that the latest Shoutcast plugin includes an aac encoder.

UJ
ujay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2013, 04:06   #4
thinktink
Forum King
 
thinktink's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: On the streets of Kings County, CA.
Posts: 3,009
Send a message via Skype™ to thinktink
Quote:
Originally Posted by ujay View Post
...that aac is definitely better at low bitrates.
If you're already broadcasting at 128kbps then there's not so much to choose between the two.
I concur.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ujay View Post
...
I think I'm right in saying that the latest Shoutcast plugin includes an aac encoder.
...
Correct.
thinktink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th December 2013, 10:07   #5
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
AAC is typically better from a broadcaster's view point as you can provide better quality audio with less bandwidth used compared to MP3 which helps to lessen audio fatigue from poorer quality reencoding. however it is client compatibility which is the main issue with AAC and is one of the main reasons why MP3 is still the most popular format for this type of streaming (or is just a lack of knowledge by most broadcasters who don't want to know or who don't want to care).
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th December 2013, 20:18   #6
stereoscenic
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 18
aac better hands down. However AAC+ (aka AAC-HE) is specifically designed for low bitrates (80kbps and lower). At 128 for example, MP3 will be truer to the original audio than AAC+

This is because AAC+ uses a transposition algorithm to actually chop off the higher frequencies, transmit the now-smaller file, and then rebuild the lost frequencies on the player end of things. This allows for much less data to be transmitted.

You might compare it to sending a mono track @ 64kpbs and then the audio player "fakes" the right channel based off of the mono track. So the end result is a 128 listening experience.

So a low bitrate AAC+ would be excellent for saving on bandwidth, and great for your mobile listeners, but you might want to also provide a higher quality MP3 for the more accurate listening experience and for the folks who may not be able to play AAC

Here's a visual for what I was struggling to explain https://www.evernote.com/shard/s310/...aaf09e0736f75b
stereoscenic is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Shoutcast > Shoutcast Technical Support

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump