AAC vs. MP3

AAC (Advanced Audio Coding) and MP3 (MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3) are lossy formats for audio files. MP3, an audio-specific format, is now the de facto standard of digital audio compression for the transfer and playback of music on digital audio players. Designed to be the successor of the MP3 format, AAC generally achieves better sound quality than MP3 at similar bit rates. This difference in quality is more obvious at lower bitrates.

Comparison chart

Edit this comparison chart

AAC

User Rating (122):

MP3

User Rating (294):
File extension .m4a, .m4b, .m4p, .m4v, .m4r, .3gp, .mp4, .aac .mp3
Handles Audio only Audio only
Portability Apple has promoted AAC - all iPods and iPhones play AAC files. However, not all music players support AAC files. Virtually all music players support MP3 files.
Format Audio Audio
MIME Type audio/aac, audio/aacp, audio/3gpp, audio/3gpp2, audio/mp4, audio/MP4A-LATM, audio/mpeg4-generic audio/mpeg
Developed by AAC was developed with the cooperation and contributions of companies including Fraunhofer IIS, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Dolby, Sony Corporation and Nokia a group of engineers from Europe, belonging to Philips, CCETT (Centre commun d'études de télévision et télécommunications), IRT and Fraunhofer Society
Released for public use on 1997 7th of July, 1994
Original Name Advanced Audio Coding MPEG – 1 Audio Layer 3
Standards ISO/IEC 13818-7, ISO/IEC 14496-3 ISO/IEC 11172-3, ISO/IEC 13818-3
Extended from Part 7 of the MPEG-2 standard, and Subpart 4 in Part 3 of the MPEG-4 standard. mp2
Algorithm Lossy Compression Lossy Compression
Popularity Popular because of iTunes and iPods. However, not as popular as MP3 De facto standard for audio files
Quality AAC offers better quality than MP3 at the same bitrate, even though AAC also uses lossy compression. MP3 offers lower quality than AAC at the same bitrate.

edit AAC vs MP3 audio quality

The AAC format was designed to be an improvement over MP3 in the following aspects:

Overall, the AAC format allows developers more flexibility to design codecs than MP3 does, and corrects many of the design choices made in the original MPEG-1 audio specification. This increased flexibility often leads to more concurrent encoding strategies and, as a result, to more efficient compression.

The MP3 specification, although antiquated, has proven surprisingly robust in spite of considerable flaws. AAC and HE-AAC are better than MP3 at low bit rates (typically less than 128 kilobits per second). This is especially true at very low bit rates where the superior stereo coding, pure MDCT, and more optimal transform window sizes leave MP3 unable to compete. However, as bit rate increases, the efficiency of an audio format becomes less important relative to the efficiency of the encoder's implementation, and the intrinsic advantage AAC holds over MP3 no longer dominates audio quality.

edit Licensing and Patents for AAC and MP3

No licenses or payments are required to be able to stream or distribute content in AAC format. This makes AAC a much more attractive format to distribute content than MP3, particularly for streaming content like Internet radio. However, a patent license is required for all manufacturers or developers of AAC codecs. It is for this reason FOSS implementations such as FAAC and FAAD are distributed in source form only, in order to avoid patent infringement.

On the other hand, Thomson, Fraunhofer IIS, Sisvel (and its U.S. subsidiary Audio MPEG), Texas MP3 Technologies, and Alcatel-Lucent all claim legal control of relevant MP3 patents related to decoders. So the legal status of MP3 remains unclear in countries where those patents are valid. However, while these patent and licensing issues affect companies, consumers are largely unconcerned and the popularity of the MP3 format has not abated.

edit References

Share this comparison:

If you read this far, you should follow us on:

"AAC vs MP3." Diffen.com. Diffen LLC, n.d. Web. 24 Oct 2014. < http://www.diffen.com/difference/AAC_vs_MP3 >

Related Comparisons Follow Diffen
Make Diffen Smarter.

Log in to edit comparisons or create new comparisons in your area of expertise!

Sign up »
Top 5 Comparisons

Comments: AAC vs MP3

Comments via Facebook

Anonymous comments (2)

March 23, 2013, 11:53pm

ACC only beats LAME 3.97+ vbr mp3s at bit rates under 128kbps.

Here-on-in Mp3s are assumed to be VBR mp3s made by LAME 3.97 or later.

At bit rates over 128kbps you will find it near impossible to tell which encoder is which at equivalent bit rates (though you may well hear differences between the two encodings)

At over 190kbps rates very few people can ABX a difference between the two encoders. Even those that can still cannot say which is which.

Basic fast advice:

If you are encoding at over even 160kbps just use LAME 3.97 or later and make VBR mp3s.

If you are encoding UNDER 128kbps go for ACC unless you need compatibility.

LAME vbr v2 encoding is transparent for the vast majority of purposes.

Everyone has different ears, get foobar2000 and the abx component and abx different encodings with at least 20 trials to see what the lowest bit rate is that you can use for YOUR ears and YOUR equipment, and still not be able to tell the difference.

— 84.✗.✗.248
1

January 23, 2012, 11:38am

Hi does apple devices support audio/MP4A-LATM ?

— 64.✗.✗.20
0

share

Up next

Amazon MP3 vs. iTunes Music Store