Thanks for the input! My target machine is an anchient feature phone that supports mp3 and AAC only. Its limited storage space combined with a speaker that does not make high bitrates justice tells me that AAC is the best choise of codec in this case.
/fuumind tor 2016-06-02 klockan 08:19 +0200 skrev Adam Borowski: > On Thu, Jun 02, 2016 at 07:22:38AM +0200, fuumind wrote: > > I wish to convert several thousands of audio files mostly in mp3 format > > to AAC > > I don't get why one would want to convert _to_ AAC. It's a format both bad > and proprietary, thus hardly supported by free software at all. It wins > with mp3 only at very low bitrates and is actually _worse_ (although usually > within the error margin) than mp3 on high bitrates. > > If your target machine is anything non-ancient, you want opus, it thoroughly > beats both mp3 and aac at any bitrate. Even I, with untrained ears and > shitty gear, can ABX 320kbit mp3 on some samples. Never tried with aac but > it's said to be similar. On the other hand, pretty few people can ABX opus > at just 96k, so encoding at 128k is fine if you're paranoid about quality. > Yes, it is that much better. > > If your target _is_ ancient, you want mp3 for compatibility. You'd need to > encode at a crap quality to let aac be significantly better. > > > but AAC does not present itself as an available target > > It's patented out of the wazoo. > _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
