[Busemann]

the results
discussion

It was an open listening test comparing the major AAC-encoders. 128kbps was used, which turned out to be nearly transparent on most samples.

an interesting note:

It's worth mentioning that according to a key developer of the QuickTime/iTunes AAC encoder, this codec nearly didn't get tuned since the last test because they were busy with porting the iTunes platform to Windows and working on speed optimization. Makes one wonder how much it can improve once the engineers start tuning it again and if a VBR mode is eventually implemented

[voodoo]

Well good stuff! AAC is a good format and the iTunes codec seems to be solid as well

[Horsepoo!!!]

That's a pretty old test. It's been around for almost a year now.

[Busemann]

Originally posted by Horsepoo!!!:
That's a pretty old test. It's been around for almost a year now.

Nope, it was published March 1, 2004

[wataru]

I thought I remembered reading that AAC is VBR as it is.

[G-Force]

This is really good news. Especially considering that the iTunes MP3 encoder bombed out big time on a similar test. It's nice to know the AAC encoder is top notch.

See here: http://www.rjamorim.com/test/mp3-128/results.html

[Moonray]

There are many such tests and comparisons on the web. A nice one is here: Encoding Observations.

-

[Cadaver]

This is a good thing.

I tend to encode my own CD transfers as 160KB AACs. At this level, to me (via headphones or my Logitech Z560 speakers), they sound at least as good as 320KB VBR MP3s.