title
Products            Buy            Support Forum            Professional            About            Codec Central
 

FDK m4a's equevalent to 192 cbr mp3

Collapse
X
Collapse
+ More Options
Posts
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • morbidCode

    • Nov 2016
    • 1

    FDK m4a's equevalent to 192 cbr mp3

    Hi, I am new here.

    I recently got the latest version of dbpoweramp. I noticed that now they are using a different encoder for m4a/aac, the fdk aac encoder.

    My preferred bitrate is 192 CBR mp3, because from that bitrate and higher I here no difference anymore. Before upgrading, I am using version 13.2 which uses nero aac and I found that the estimate bitrate of vbr 160 kbps is fine and equivalent to mp3 cbr 192 kbps.

    Now, I am shocked to find that the quality settings are somewhat different. Now it has only 5 quality settings (64, 80, 96, 144 and 224). My favorite 160 can no longer be found.

    My question is, is there anything in these quality settings that is equivalent to mp3 cbr's 192 bitrate?

    Thanks.
  • Overlord_Laharl

    • Aug 2015
    • 18

    #2
    Re: FDK m4a's equevalent to 192 cbr mp3

    are you planning to convert your mp3s to the format or are you ripping the media again
    http://www.howtogeek.com/142174/what...y-to-lossless/ scroll down about half way (AAC is lossy)
    TL;DR converting between lossy formats is like making a copy of a copy (do it too much and you wind up with a illegable document.)
    you lose data every conversion, convert the file enough and it bocomes static

    converting a lossless to lossless is like printing the document from your computer, there is no lost data. unless you have a bad printer (where the printer is your speakers/headphones)

    also AAC is a highly optimised format so i cant say one way or another but all i can say is try a few different compressions and find one that works for you

    160 should be fine, for your aac.
    the main difference between nero and this one is the compression is more effective and its faster (more boom for the byte)

    Comment

    Working...

    ]]>