[audiomagnate]

I think this sounds pretty good, what do you guys think?

Edit: It was OK at work, but now I'm hearing the weirdness. Time for a vinyl fix.

http://www.cpr.org/index.php?option=...ask=view&id=43

Click on aacPlus on the classical side.

 

[kamuela]

Didn't listen to it, but I agree, low-bitrate stuff surprises me nowadays. Not at all up to audiophile standards, but you have to admit these lossy codecs are getting better.

 

[Garbz]

You're missing a unit. 32kps could be 32kHz or 32kbps, or 32kBps, or in german 32000Horsepower per second which makes no sense.

It's true lossy encoders are getting better but it's far from perfect. The fact is some information is still being thrown to the dogs. It's interesting that the audio standards are getting more and more compressed while video stanards are working harder and harder to use as much space as possible. Care to guess the bitrate of a Blueray

 

[e_resolu]

I tried eAAC+ from 64kbps to 128kbps (CBR and VBR) and found an acceptable quality loss regarding the compression. Very good ratio between quality and size at 64kbps.
Anyway I found the mp3 compression to better keep some subtle sounds: for example the movement of fingers on the guitar cords.

 

[skellington]

I don't know about AAC, but OGG at lower bitrates is very impressive. If you want to pack as much as you can on to a portable device it's very useful.

 

[SonicDawg]

Not to nitpick or anything, but ACC Plus actually recreates artificially the high frequencies. To me it doesn't sound too natural.

 

[Redo]

OGG is the best at low bitrates that I've heard. Supposedly there's some other codecs out there that do even better, but I haven't gotten to tinker around with any.

 

[Lad27]

x2 on OGG. Done quite a bit of music downloading lately, used OGG q9 setting. Very impressive, as good as FLAC to my old ears.

 

[bigshot]

OGG and AAC are very similar. They both have advanced the quality of compressed audio a lot.

See ya
Steve