🚀 go-pugleaf

jj, curmudgeon and tiring philalethist wrote in message ...
>In article <799d94$670$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>,  <md_fan@usa.net> wrote:
>>But the formats are intended for different purposes.  You can record almost
>>any source on a MiniDisc (including MP3s) but MP3s themselves are just a
file
>>format.  Why not just use both?
>
>Why not use MPEG-2 AAC, which is a new standard that provides, according
>to properly executed DBT's, better performance at 96kb/s than MP3 does
>at 128kb/s, and that has a performance at 128kb/s that is has a higher
>mean than AC3 at 192 kb/s (not that AC3 is bad at that bitrate, please).
>(To be clear, the AAC 128 and AC3 192 are NOT statistically distinguishable
>to 5%)


IMO, this question is "better than ever". There are AAC encoders and decoders
on the web, and there is an AAC plug-in for the leading MP3 player, at the
Winamp web site. This "plug in" makes playing AAC files pretty transparent to
the user from the standpoint of ease-of-use. The usual run of flag-waving MP3
sites provide links to many of the AAC sites.

Of course, that raises the question of "how good are these things, anyhow"?

I need to get off my lazy butt and evaluate some of this stuff. ;-)