title
Products            Buy            Support Forum            Professional            About            Codec Central
 
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Acc and MP3 Lame question

  1. #1

    Aac and MP3 Lame question

    Hi guys I just want to ask about Aac vbr and mp3 lame. The most comfortable bitrate in mp3 for me is CBR 192 kbps. I realized that aac files can be smaller so I tried it. When I go to a vbr radio button, my screenreader (I'm visually impaired) says: quality vbr: 150 kbps. Is it equivalent to 192 kbps? Thanks.
    Last edited by pyroclastic; 08-29-2012 at 02:33 AM.

  2. #2
    dBpoweramp Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    190

    Re: Aac and MP3 Lame question

    A few things.....

    1.) Unless you have ancient equipment, I would not use CBR. VBR is far more efficient.

    2.) It's not entirely accurate to claim that AAC files can be smaller. AAC is a more advanced codec. It has been suggested that an AAC encoded at 128 kbps will be more transparent than an MP3 at the same bitrate. However, I would not place my complete faith in such claims. The key is how it sounds to you, personally.

    3.) This is important: DO NOT CONVERT YOUR MP3s to AAC. Transcoding (Google it) from one lossy codec to another is NEVER a good idea. If you are intent on switching to AAC, I would re-rip your CD collection. Preferably to something lossless (like FLAC). Since FLACs are lossless, you can transcode till you're blue in the face.

    4.) If it ain't broke, why fix it? If you're happy with CBR 192, there is really no need to change things.

  3. #3

    Re: Aac and MP3 Lame question

    Quote Originally Posted by eaglescout1998 View Post
    3.) This is important: DO NOT CONVERT YOUR MP3s to AAC. Transcoding (Google it) from one lossy codec to another is NEVER a good idea. If you are intent on switching to AAC, I would re-rip your CD collection. Preferably to something lossless (like FLAC). Since FLACs are lossless, you can transcode till you're blue in the face.
    How mutch lost in quality to the aac file? Is it as noticeable as say, from 192 to 160 mp3?
    Quote Originally Posted by eaglescout1998 View Post
    4.) If it ain't broke, why fix it? If you're happy with CBR 192, there is really no need to change things.
    I have to make it smaller because I'm running out of memmory.

  4. #4
    dBpoweramp Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    190

    Re: Aac and MP3 Lame question

    How mutch lost in quality to the aac file? Is it as noticeable as say, from 192 to 160 mp3?
    Since you are the one who is going to be listening, only you can answer that question.

    What I can tell you is this: Every time you encode with a lossy encoder (MP3 or AAC), the quality will decrease. There's no way to get that quality back. It's gone. If transcode from 192kbps to 160kbps, the resulting file will be of worse quality than it would have been had you ripped to 160kbps in the first place. That's why lossy-to-lossy transcoding is not recommended.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •