4 ms·
although Opus is very nice, it's not as efficient ... as HE-AAC Uh, no, this is not correct. If you try to find a source, you'll easily find the opposite is ve
by rockdoe 3y ago
although Opus is very nice, it's not as efficient ... as HE-AAC
Uh, no, this is not correct. If you try to find a source, you'll easily find the opposite is very well established.
- CharlesW 3y agoHere's a "Quality vs Bitrate" chart from opus-codec.org, the home of Opus: https://opus-codec.org/static/comparison/quality.svg https://opus-codec.org/static/comparison/quality.svg Note how AAC has effectively the same efficiency as Opus? HE-AAC and HE-AACv2 are notably better in comparison, and are usable at lower bitrates than AAC. In cases where "the opposite is very well established", they're talking about AAC-LC. Citations that show otherwise are welcome! In any case, HE-AAC's universality is really beaten only by MP3 (which it trounces).
- ksec 3y agoI assuming you are using HE-AAC at below 96kbps? Because above AAC-LC should perform better.