[FFmpeg-user] For aac: which lib - aac? libaacplus? libfaac?
krueger at lesspain.de
Thu Jun 14 10:52:28 CEST 2012
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 11:33 PM, Lou <lou at lrcd.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 17:08:26 -0400
> sean darcy <seandarcy2 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 06/11/2012 10:19 PM, sean darcy wrote:
>> > For encoding aac, which lib is preferred? aac has lots of bad notices,
>> > but has it been fixed? libfaac web site says it's not really good. And I
>> > can't find much on libaacplus.
>> > Which lib are people using?
>> > sean
>> Isn't anybody encoding with aac?
> FFmpeg can also encode with libvo_aacenc. Why not try them yourself and
> see what you like best? For LC-AAC with similar bitrates I'd probably
> qaac (Apple) > neroaacenc > faac => libvo-aacenc > ffaacenc
my experience is that for anything serious (i.e. a product that
produces sound for a consumer to enjoy in good quality) both internal
aac and libvo_aac are not acceptable, whereas faac is (but not
redistributable, which may or may not be a problem for you). Maybe I
am doing something wrong but I have not been able to produce aac files
without audible artifacts using libvo_aac event at bitrates like 256k,
which should be more than enough, whereas the same signal encoded with
faac sounds like the original with a lower bitrate than that. To me
this is probably one of the most requested features (a redistributable
aac good encoder) of ffmpeg and I'm still hoping that an agreement can
be reached on a crowd funding platform top sponsor such a project
(i.e. make internal aac better/acceptable for more uses) because I
suspect many people would fund this if a volunteer was there. I sure
would but I am by far not able to cough up enough money to be
seriously attractive for a dev to take this on.
regarding quality of libvo_aac you might want to read this:
More information about the ffmpeg-user