Thread: AAC - Opinions?
View Single Post
  #7 (permalink)  
Old October 13th 04, 01:47 PM posted to rec.audio.opinion,rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.tech,uk.rec.audio
Ralph Barone
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default AAC - Opinions?

In article ,
"Pete." wrote:

I don't like the 128kb/s AAC files that iTunes sell, I only wish they'd up
the bitrate a bit. Most of the CD's I have imported to iTunes are in 192kb/s
and that I am happy with.


"Andy Hewitt" wrote in message
...
asdfg wrote:

I have an MP3 player capable of playing AAC format as well as MP3. All of
my
music in currently in MP3 format.

Should I convert my MP3 files to a slightly lower bitrate AAC? Is 96kbps
AAC
any good? - because if I converted tracks to that I'd get a lot more on
my
player.

Overall, what are people's opinions of AAC?


AAC is supposed to be a little better than MP3, although it's still a
'lossy' compression.

Why 96kbps? iTunes Music Store uses 128kbps, and having burnt a few to
CD now, I have to say I can't fault the sound quality.

--
Andy Hewitt ** FAF#1, (Ex-OSOS#5) - FJ1200 ABS
Honda Civic 16v: Windows free zone (Mac G5 Dual Processor)
http://www.thehewitts.plus.com


More to the point, if you reencode an MP3 file as an AAC file, it will
likely sound worse than the original MP3 file, regardless of what bit
rate you chose. Running lossy compression codecs in series is a bad
idea. Now if you want to reencode your original CDs into AAC format,
that's a different question, and one worth asking.