What is an AAC?

michaelsanford

michaelsanford

Translator, Web Developer
Sorry for my ignorance, but before Jobbs' "music to my ears" announcement, I'd never ever heard of an AAC.

What is (are) the advangate(s) of using AAC over MP3, besides a maginally smaller file? I understand AAC has some kind of digital rights management scheme as well? (And for the sake of completeness, what does the acronym stand for:p ?)

Basically, I want to know if it's worth my time to re-rip or re-encode my 2400 (or 11,23 gigabyte worth) of MP3s to AAC, because that will be a lot of time and effort on my part.

Thanks!
 
AAC stands for Advanced Audio Codec. It is marginally better quality than Mpeg3. However, I could see no reason why you would want to re-encode your Mp3s. I have a similar collection (about 13 gig) and I know I won't be bothering to re-rip my CDs.
 
I have converted my 9G library to ACC. I can't tell the difference on the iPod's headphones between MP3 at 192kbps and ACC at 128kbps. The advantage is that ACC files use approximately 2/3 the space MP3s use, so I can put a lot more music on my iPod!
 
AAC, not ACC.

AAC simply i the very last codec they found to encode music, concisely and precisely. It does integrate a form of protection; watch hack channels to get the crack in a few weeks.
 
all you people claiming you can barley hear a diffrence from AAC to MP3 must have shitty speakers or be smoking weed. AAC at 96kb still Rivals CD quality. Try it for your self if you don't belive me... (of course you need good speakers)
 
Originally posted by cq107
all you people claiming you can barley hear a diffrence from AAC to MP3 must have shitty speakers or be smoking weed. AAC at 96kb still Rivals CD quality. Try it for your self if you don't belive me... (of course you need good speakers)
Click to expand...
While I agree that there's a benfefit to moving to AAC (files sizes especially, and it does sound quite nice, 128kbps is surprisingly good), AAC at 96 does NOT rival CD quality! Remember its still a lossy format, just like mp3, its just slightly better than mp3! There another thread on Gerneral Discussion (I think, or it could be news and rumours) with some more in depth posts. They could probably do with being merged actually.
 
Originally posted by cq107
all you people claiming you can barley hear a diffrence from AAC to MP3 must have shitty speakers or be smoking weed. AAC at 96kb still Rivals CD quality. Try it for your self if you don't belive me... (of course you need good speakers)
Click to expand...

No.

People who hear a difference have rencoded MP3 to AAC. Hence, they have compressed an already compressed sound and fallen under CD quality. Sort of feedback loop, if you prefer.

So those people who can barely hear a difference don't always have sh!tty speakers nor smoke weed (nor both).

Try for yourself if you don't believe me (of course you need good ears).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top