CDRLabs.com

Is it impossible to have both Nero 5.5 and 6 installed at the same time?

Don't even think about it.

Slim

I was afraid so...

So far i have been using 5.5

Now i have installed 6, because i want to use the encoder to encode AACs.
I am just wondering if Nero 6 will perform ok on my computer. It is an old PII 400mhz 64mb RAM. Should i continue using 5.5 like earlier, or will 6 be ok?

Garathor wrote:I was afraid so...

So far i have been using 5.5

Now i have installed 6, because i want to use the encoder to encode AACs.
I am just wondering if Nero 6 will perform ok on my computer. It is an old PII 400mhz 64mb RAM. Should i continue using 5.5 like earlier, or will 6 be ok?

Bad choice for encoding.

I would recommend using Exact Audio Copy 0.95 Beta 4, Lame 3.90.3 (MP3 Encoder) and encode them as Variable Bit Rate MP3 files.

Use the "--alt-preset extreme %s %d" switch if you want excellent quality rips, otherwise if space is an issue you can use "--alt-preset standard %s %d" which is almost as good.

Use google to find download links. Here are two tutorials. The second one is more comprehensive with screenshots on how to set things up.

http://www.chrismyden.com/nuke/article.php?sid=116
http://www.ping.be/satcp/cd2mp3-en.htm

Yes, that is the way i DO encode my mp3s. (Or actually i make CD Images in EAC because i want to store them in a lossless format (FLAC or MA), and i use Foobar 2000 to encode it to mp3s using the command line encoder pointing it to Lame 3.90.3 using the --alt-preset standard profile).

If you now reread my post, you will notice that it is not mp3s i want to encode, but AACs. Since mp3 is a crappy format, i have decided to start using another one (AAC or Musepack). After reading at the Hydrogen Audio forum, i have understood that the Nero encoder is regarded as the best AAC encoder for high bitrates at the moment.

Garathor wrote:Yes, that is the way i DO encode my mp3s. (Or actually i make CD Images in EAC because i want to store them in a lossless format (FLAC or MA), and i use Foobar 2000 to encode it to mp3s using the command line encoder pointing it to Lame 3.90.3 using the --alt-preset standard profile).

If you now reread my post, you will notice that it is not mp3s i want to encode, but AACs. Since mp3 is a crappy format, i have decided to start using another one (AAC or Musepack). After reading at the Hydrogen Audio forum, i have understood that the Nero encoder is regarded as the best AAC encoder for high bitrates at the moment.

Encoding AAC us a pretty broad statement, try being more specific. Since you didn't indicate what you were doing before, it makes it kind of dofficult to figure out how far along the curve you are.

MPC and AAC are also both lossy formats. Not to mention, AAC has DRM capabilities which could impact you further down the road. The only time that MPC and AAC are better than a MP3 is @ lower bitrates. Other than that... I'd doubt you would hear a difference if you're using --at-preset extreme at higher bitrates.

FYI the guy expounding on Nero AAC on Hydrogen works for Ahead. Take his comments with a grain of salt.

If you're an audiofile, I'd expect you'd be using MA or FLAC regardless.

I'd recommend using OGG. It's regarded as the king of lossy formats and more portable devices are starting to support it.

newbie question: what's MA ?

I disagree. I believe AAC and MPC sound better tham MP3, at least MPC. And the AAC encoders will get better, won't they? I am already using Ogg Vorbis as well.

In the Nero 6 encoder, i am using the VBR Extreme preset. I do store all my CDs in lossless format (MA), but i am hoping to get a portable player that supports AAC or Ogg Vorbis. Not much hope for a portable to support MA or FLAC.

(MA is "Monkey's Audio", a lossless format providing good compression)

which is better: Mokey's Audio or Flac ?

Mokey's Audio will give the best compression.

In sound quality there is no difference, they are both perfect (no loss at all).

If you decide to use Monkey's Audio, use version 3.97. Not the 3.98 alpha version.