AAC vs. MP3 vs. WMA

[Dingo Jellybean]

Okay, I just discovered that iTunes is probably one of the greatest format conversion software available, free or licensed.

But, since I'm not tech-savvy, how do the quality of AAC vs. MP3 compare? Vs. WMA? I want to know because my AAC files take up about 2% more space than MP3s at 56kbps compression. But I did notice a significant jump in quality when recompressing from 128kbps MP3s to 56kbps AACs vs. 56kbps MP3s. This is so I can store about 10000-11000 songs on my iPod as opposed to just 3700. The sound quality doesn't dip that much and still sounds great in my car stereo when I use the iCarPlay Plus.

So any suggestions? In the future, if Apple _EVER_ decides to accept WMA, I might convery my files to WMA as well. But Apple hates WMA like Microsoft hates AAC. And neither are willing to accept the competitors' format. I know AAC was dull 5 years ago, but the quality has improved drastically, which is why I want some opinions.

So, any ideas?

[fire_of_avalon]

I think you should become involved in marketing relations for the Apple iPod.

Other than that, I don't have any opinions.

[-N-]

OMG FOA HAS SARS

And AAC/WMA should go to hell and be standardized as MP3. Ye-e-s...

[theundeadhero]

Yesterday we had CTT training and then EO training by the LT and the CO! It was at the company AO!

As long as you agree that the sound quality is only slightly less than the other, and you still enjoy it, I would go with it for the extra storage space.

[Yamaneko]

This goes in help. *moves*

[Dr Unne]

Technically speaking, OGG is superior at least to MP3, in terms of filesize and sound quality both. Technical merit doesn't matter at all to most people though, and even this comment is likely to be ignored. MP3 is good because it's a broad standard, but it's an old format, and almost everything will be technically superior nowadays. Presonally I'd avoid WMA just because it's MS-driven. I'd avoid AAC because it's Mac-driven. Proprietary formats are bad. You're relying upon a company to give you what you need to control your music. Open standards are good, because they'll be continuously improved, and because you know exactly what you're getting, and because you will have a wide variety of programs that work with your data.

So far as conversion, if you convert AAC to WMA or vice versa, you're going to be compressing your data twice, in a lossy way, and it's going to suck. CD -> WMA or CD -> AAC is the only way to go. You may already have known that though. If you've already ripped / downloaded all your songs, I'd keep them in the format they're in, or else re-rip them.

If you're comfortable using Mac stuff and you plan only to use Mac hardware, then use whatever Mac format recommends, would be my advice. No reason not to and it's most likely to work properly.

[Dingo Jellybean]

After experimenting with iTunes, I noticed that after ripping my U2 Joshua Tree CD, the sound had a lot of static when I ripped it into AAC. The sound quality was slightly better, but the static makes the music unbearable, so I had to stick with a slightly less quality MP3.

As far as I know, OOG cannot be played on a 3G iPod. Though I hope software will help, but iTunes does not convert to OOG, so I'm assuming no iPods can play OOG. Though AAC isn't technically Apple(it's Dolby), MS doesn't seem reluctant to support the format because Apple invest so much into it.

Right now, most of my files are unprotected MP3s. Other files are m4p(Apple's encrypted version of MP4) and m4a(apple's unprotected MP4s). The MP4 formats, obviously, sound great. It's the format iTunes uses, and they do allow me to convert to MP3/WAV/AIFF. No OOG, even though I've heard great things about a format that I can't use on my iPod.

I'll probably stick with MP3s, only because MS programs do not support them, but WinAMP does...using a plugin.

[Max]

whats a wma?

[Yamaneko]

Windows Media Audio

[Max]

windows media files are free right so basicly you can download music for free right?

[Mirage]

Wrong. The format is free to use for most, as you get a license to encode/decode wma with windows, but the audio contained in the file still belongs to the artist/record company.

[crono_logical]

After experimenting with iTunes, I noticed that after ripping my U2 Joshua Tree CD, the sound had a lot of static when I ripped it into AAC. The sound quality was slightly better, but the static makes the music unbearable, so I had to stick with a slightly less quality MP3.

As far as I know, OOG cannot be played on a 3G iPod. Though I hope software will help, but iTunes does not convert to OOG, so I'm assuming no iPods can play OOG. Though AAC isn't technically Apple(it's Dolby), MS doesn't seem reluctant to support the format because Apple invest so much into it.

Right now, most of my files are unprotected MP3s. Other files are m4p(Apple's encrypted version of MP4) and m4a(apple's unprotected MP4s). The MP4 formats, obviously, sound great. It's the format iTunes uses, and they do allow me to convert to MP3/WAV/AIFF. No OOG, even though I've heard great things about a format that I can't use on my iPod.

I'll probably stick with MP3s, only because MS programs do not support them, but WinAMP does...using a plugin.

Yeah, but Winamp comes with the mp3 plugin in the first place, so that hardly counts as a seperate thing to fetch and install As far as I know, all recent Windows installation include full mp3 decoding support too. Maybe you're getting mixed up with AAC or another format? Even then though, I'm sure if you can get a plugin for Winamp, you can also get a DirectShow based plugin so MS players (or any DirectShow based player) can also play it.

Not sure what you're getting at saying the quality of the AACs were better, but had static so you didn't like them. Seems like a contradiction to me

windows media files are free right so basicly you can download music for free right?

Not like you can't do that with other formats too. You can download what you like, a file's still a file, same rules apply, same stuff about copyright etc. too you need to pay attention to. Unlike MP3 though, WMA can add copy protection to your stuff you rip so it can't be played on another computer other than your own. Or maybe you have to copy some license files, I don't know, since I avoid that format myself.

[Dingo Jellybean]

Yeah, but Winamp comes with the mp3 plugin in the first place, so that hardly counts as a seperate thing to fetch and install As far as I know, all recent Windows installation include full mp3 decoding support too. Maybe you're getting mixed up with AAC or another format? Even then though, I'm sure if you can get a plugin for Winamp, you can also get a DirectShow based plugin so MS players (or any DirectShow based player) can also play it.

Not sure what you're getting at saying the quality of the AACs were better, but had static so you didn't like them. Seems like a contradiction to me

Yeah, I got confused. WinAMP has an AAC plugin. When I recompressed the 256kbps MP3s to 56kbps, the sound was pretty soft. When I compressed them to 56kbps AACs, the sound was definitely more sturdy and stronger.

But when I ripped my CDs into 56kbps AACs, the sound had a lot of static. When I ripped them to 56kbps MP3s, the sound was pretty good. So I may need to do a bit more homework on to why that is.

[Samuraid]

WMA ver. 9 and OGG are very very similar! They sound nearly the same at similar bitrates.

MP3 is not as good.

I haven't run any tests on AAC yet.

[Max]

Wrong. The format is free to use for most, as you get a license to encode/decode wma with windows, but the audio contained in the file still belongs to the artist/record company.

ohhhhhhhhhhhh.............