Nice, I'm looking forward to seeing how this performs in practice. FFmpeg's previous AAC encoder produced poor quality output and often had irritating chirping artifacts, so I've always had to install Apple's Core Audio encoder on any computer I do video recording on to get decent sound. I've done A/B/X comparisons and found that a 320kbps MP3 sounds better than a 320kbps AAC encoded by FFmpeg, but about the same as a 256kbps AAC encoded by Core Audio. If installing Core Audio is no longer necessary, that'll be a huge improvement and people who use something like OBS to do screen recordings or streaming will get a massive sound quality boost the next time they update.
repelsteeltje 13 minutes ago [-]
Why not use a lossless codec if you care about quality? Or use Opus, descent for specht and works pretty much anywhere these days.
cogman10 35 minutes ago [-]
Man what a showcase for Opus this is.
Don't get me wrong, this sort of thing is a valuable exercise and we are better off with better encoders for these older codecs. But look at the numbers for Opus on this benchmark. It simply blows all the AAC encoders out of the water even at 64 kbps.
I read almost all the way through your comment thinking there was a decent probability you were saying this new AAC encoder was written with Claude Opus.
ndiddy 17 minutes ago [-]
The biggest advantage for having a good AAC encoder isn't efficiency, it's that for nearly the past 2 decades the de facto standard for live streamed video has been RTMP with H.264 video and AAC audio. There is basically no support for any other codecs. If you want to send a video stream to Youtube or Twitch, you will be sending H.264 and AAC. If you want an idea of how ubiquitous this is, I just checked in OBS and it will not even let you select different video and audio codecs in streaming mode, it just (correctly) assumes that anybody who's streaming will be streaming H.264 and AAC.
CharlesW 6 minutes ago [-]
Plus, at 96+ kbps (assuming an Apple-quality AAC-LC encoder) Opus loses its quality advantage. So at higher bitrates, the benefit of choosing Opus is that encoders/decoders are royalty-free.
repelsteeltje 8 minutes ago [-]
Sample accurate editing is with AAC is a pain though. Especially if you also have video, because frame rates are usually incompatible.
If you want flexibility without fully transcoding both audio and video, Opus is your friend
jck86 6 minutes ago [-]
Choosing a lossy audio codec has become such a no brainer. Either use opus and be done with it or if for some reason opus cannot be used then use aac for compatibility with insane high bitrate for good quality without having to do research on what encoder and mode to pick.
Still having a good quality and default aac encoder is great. Though I don't get why it is mainly CBR.
skydhash 7 minutes ago [-]
I would like Opus, but I’m using a subsonic client on iOS and my choice has been Flac (Alac?), MP3, or AAC. Opus wouldn’t play (There are some that supported it, but I didn’t like their UX).
> The encoder was mainly optimized for 48Khz audio. Get over it. It's 2026, resampling is free, 48Khz is the standard. 44.1Khz will work, and so will 96Khz but use 48Khz if you want the best quality.
Is 48kHz really the standard nowadays?
pipo234 2 minutes ago [-]
48kHz makes alignment between video and audio so much easier. (I.e.: Lip synchronization after edits)
legdoge 6 minutes ago [-]
AAC has a strange quirk that the window size is dependent on the sampling rate, thus requiring a complete psychoacoustics reoptimization of all encoder parameters for each sampling rate, since a 20msec window sounds very different than a 60msec window, to human ears.
This was of course fixed in Opus.
5 minutes ago [-]
xuhu 10 minutes ago [-]
For one, audio transcription services that use Whisper will sample the input down to 16Khz mono first.
asveikau 42 minutes ago [-]
I know the opus codec assumes everything is 48kHz and will resample inputs to that.
TheChaplain 43 minutes ago [-]
48kHz has been the recommended setting with Premiere Pro as long as I can remember.
44.1kHz, isn't that what lameMP3 uses as default?
williadc 18 minutes ago [-]
It's what CDs use, so it would make sense for mp3 encoders to follow suit.
izacus 36 minutes ago [-]
Yes, pretty much all new hardware uses it as default output setting as well (by that I mean laptops, phones, smart speakers, etc.)
atoav 39 minutes ago [-]
More or less. Streaming is often done with 48, video content has ben 48 for a while now, so unless you still produce content for CDs it is the standard.
44100 Hz had reasons no longer really needed (storing audio in 3 samples per line in VHS: 490 lines × 3 samples × 30 GPS = 44100 sample/s).
Qualitywise both are more than enough snd 99.99% of people would not be able to tell it apart in a blind test. Higher sample rates than 48kHz only needed when you want to pitch down ultrasonic recordings (of whales, bats and other such animals for example).
Aside from this higher than 48 kHz sample rates may have only downsides, like increased size and potential distortion in the ultrasonic frequency range that has sidebands in the audible range. Yet there is a persistent, but unscientific "more-is-better"-crowd in the HiFi-sector.
duped 18 minutes ago [-]
> Higher sample rates than 48kHz only needed when you want to pitch down ultrasonic recordings (of whales, bats and other such animals for example).
There are numerous use cases for higher sample rates that go beyond this but it's hard to talk about it without starting flame wars filled with junk science.
zamadatix 9 minutes ago [-]
Say it or don't but "I have evidence otherwise but don't think I should say" is just as bad a flame war gateway as tempting the junk science audiophiles directly.
43 minutes ago [-]
HugoTea 50 minutes ago [-]
>FFmpeg's AAC DEcoder is busted with regards to stereo PNS, and the bug may be in other AAC decoders too, so we work around it in the encoder. Since no other encoder used PNS, the bug was not found until now.
I don't know what PNS is, but I bet this has been bothering someone's niche use-case for 20 years
A very welcomed addition, hopefully I can replace fdk-aac
thisislife2 4 hours ago [-]
Flagged for the wrong link.
defrost 4 hours ago [-]
Hopefully they see this - there's still time to edit the submission link.
ledoge 4 hours ago [-]
It doesn't let me edit the link, but I'm confused by what even happened here... I posted this from my phone and that wrong link doesn't show up in my clipboard history.
Don't get me wrong, this sort of thing is a valuable exercise and we are better off with better encoders for these older codecs. But look at the numbers for Opus on this benchmark. It simply blows all the AAC encoders out of the water even at 64 kbps.
I take it you mean this Opus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opus_(audio_format)) not that Opus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_(AI)).
I read almost all the way through your comment thinking there was a decent probability you were saying this new AAC encoder was written with Claude Opus.
If you want flexibility without fully transcoding both audio and video, Opus is your friend
Still having a good quality and default aac encoder is great. Though I don't get why it is mainly CBR.
Is 48kHz really the standard nowadays?
This was of course fixed in Opus.
44.1kHz, isn't that what lameMP3 uses as default?
44100 Hz had reasons no longer really needed (storing audio in 3 samples per line in VHS: 490 lines × 3 samples × 30 GPS = 44100 sample/s).
Qualitywise both are more than enough snd 99.99% of people would not be able to tell it apart in a blind test. Higher sample rates than 48kHz only needed when you want to pitch down ultrasonic recordings (of whales, bats and other such animals for example).
Aside from this higher than 48 kHz sample rates may have only downsides, like increased size and potential distortion in the ultrasonic frequency range that has sidebands in the audible range. Yet there is a persistent, but unscientific "more-is-better"-crowd in the HiFi-sector.
There are numerous use cases for higher sample rates that go beyond this but it's hard to talk about it without starting flame wars filled with junk science.
I don't know what PNS is, but I bet this has been bothering someone's niche use-case for 20 years
Link should be: https://hydrogenaudio.org/index.php/topic,129691.0.html
Our software follows redirs and somehow we got a 302 to our own IP. Perhaps it is someone's idea of a bot detector?
* quick email to HN@ycombinator.com with a "Help Me please!! and link ( mods can edit link in and sideline (hide) these comments )
* Just live with the rotting fish head of public boo boo (we've all made mistakes, as the Dalek said whilst climbing down off the dustbin)
* I can kill the whole thing dead.