dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
2060
share rss forum feed

floydb1982

join:2004-08-25
Kent, WA
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Clearwire Wireless

What ever became of mp3PRO???

What ever happened mp3PRO 96 Kbps, 22 kHz, 2 channel, 16 bit format???

Wasn't mp3PRO suppose to replace the standard MP3 format and become the new standard???

I was reading at one where mp3PRO 96 Kbps, 22 kHz can sound better at reproducing audio than the current MP3 320 Kbps, 44 kHz.

Yet there are no devices or computer software that support the new mp3PRO format but only the standard MP3 format.


aurgathor

join:2002-12-01
Lynnwood, WA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
said by floydb1982:

What ever happened mp3PRO 96 Kbps, 22 kHz, 2 channel, 16 bit format???

Wasn't mp3PRO suppose to replace the standard MP3 format and become the new standard???

I was reading at one where mp3PRO 96 Kbps, 22 kHz can sound better at reproducing audio than the current MP3 320 Kbps, 44 kHz.

That's in the "even if it's true, I don't believe it" department.
--
Wacky Races 2012!


Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:2
reply to floydb1982
MP3 is an open protocol. MP3Pro is not. And it never lived up to the hype, certainly not enough to warrant the licensing costs.


Vchat20
Landing is the REAL challenge
Premium
join:2003-09-16
Columbus, OH
said by Camelot One:

MP3 is an open protocol. MP3Pro is not. And it never lived up to the hype, certainly not enough to warrant the licensing costs.

On top of this, AAC+ came in and pretty much replaced it entirely. Same concepts, not ENTIRELY open but moreso than MP3Pro (but has been 'opened' easily by the community), and is very well supported these days.
--
I swear, some people should have pace-makers installed to free up the resources. Breathing and heart beat taxes their whole system, all of their brain cells wasted on life support.-two bit brains, and the second bit is wasted on parity! ~head_spaz


totamak
And they call me nuts?

join:2000-10-24
Los Angeles, CA
reply to floydb1982
MP3Pro was simply MP3 using SBR (spectral band replication). MP3Pro IS MP3. But it's using a technique where the source is sample rate reduced in encoding (going from an audio CD of 44.1 kHz) by half. The missing upper half information, the upper harmonics, is then reproduced using SBR. It's a bit of software voodoo that works reasonably well for low bit rate situations. SBR is used in the AAC-HE incarnation of AAC-LC (AAC-HE-v2 goes even further with parametric stereo added in).

Now the result is that you have a "core" MP3 recording at half the sample rate it says it is - which makes it compatible with almost all MP3 players (so a 44.1 kHz MP3Pro file will play at 22.05 kHz using the "core" MP3 portion on a non-MP3Pro capable player). With a compatible player, SBR kicks in. Keep in mind, SBR does require some data - it's not just some algorithm that auto-magically replicates whats lost - it needs some information. So if you take a source and encode two versions - one being ordinary MP3 using 22.05 kHz sample rate at 64 Kbps and a MP3Pro at 44.1 kHz at 64 Kbps, but play it back on a normal MP3 mode - the ordinary MP3 file will be superior since all of it's bit rate is for the actual MP3 stream while the MP3Pro has to split it between the core stream and the SBR data stream (which is fairly small, but it's still there). You would need to encode a MP3Pro at more than half to reach the same quality versus the normal joe MP3.

MP3Pro failed for a variety of reasons. First off, SBR itself is a software patented technology which meant more licensing fees separate from the already expensive MP3 licensing fees. MP3 was the dominant, entrenched player, but the companies who held the IP demanded rather stiff fees. When AAC was rolled out, the main licensing body went for low fees. Even when AAC gained SBR (AAC-HE is just AAC-LC with SBR), the difference still favored AAC. Making a player capable of base MP3 plus full blown AAC support is cheaper licensing wise than MP3Pro without any kind of AAC support.

Second reason, MP3Pro commercial encoders relied on IFS derived MP3 encoder software. IFS sucked at this, their base MP3 encoder has been traditionally a pile of crap. It wasn't just inferior to LAME, it was inferior to just about all other commercial MP3 encoder libraries used. However only IFS had the MP3Pro implementation (mostly because no one else cared to use it). People pay licensing fees to IFS, but they are NOT using IFS derived encoders.

People had choices:

WMA - which wasn't great, but Microsoft was pushing it hard. This gained wide acceptance for mid-late 2000s era PMPs not made by Apple. However it did use a DRM lock in. It's also a mediocre format.

Vorbis - FOSS solution which worked well and competed against AAC. But saw little support.

AAC - which had a LOWER licensing overhead than MP3 even with AAC-HE included and it's what Apple had for their PMPs. It has significantly better encoding quality for the bit rate.

LAME - which has vastly better MP3 encoding quality over all commercial choices by a ridiculous margin, this is why MP3 held on so well. Why go with something unsupported when LAME delivers great quality for the bits and universally supported.