[Icecast-dev] Streaming AAC with libshout?

RJ Ryan rryan at mixxx.org
Mon Jun 24 14:55:39 PDT 2013

Hi all -- chiming in from the perspective of Mixxx <http://mixxx.org> (a
FLOSS DJ software program with millions of downloads yearly). We use
libshout for streaming support and we regularly get requests for AAC
support (and increasingly, shoutcast2). I'll just +1 what others have said
about how it's unfortunate for our users that libshout is so strongly
opposed to making API changes to make it easier on users of libshout to
support AAC encoded streams.

The end result is that Mixxx is on unequal footing with commercial software
out there. Free software is seen as cheap and less capable. "You get what
you pay for" has already been said in this thread and that's a meme that
really does not favor FLOSS adoption.

Respectfully, please change your stance on this issue!

Warm regards,
RJ Ryan
Mixxx lead developer

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:50 PM, marcin at saepia.net <marcin at saepia.net>wrote:

> Thomas, it is a bit ridiculous, to be honest. If whole open source
> community have been thinking like this none of the linux distros would have
> ever had any multimedia player that is usable by regular user because all
> of the would have been supporting only Vorbis and Theora. For me, one of
> the best things in open source is its interoperability, not that it is a
> ghetto.
> And you won't reverse the fact that it is AAC which is supported even by
> oldest Android phones, not Opus by banning AAC support in libshout.
> Your argument about Opus will be valid in let's say 2016 when most users
> will migrate to hardware & software that supports Opus. Not earlier.
> Personally I would be glad to see Opis widely supported ASAP but truth is
> that AD 2013 it is supported by no major software and hardware and I, and
> possibly not only me, have clients right now that are requesting
> low-bandwidth solution possible to integrate with their SaaS service
> (sorry, Orban). I can't tell them "wait till Opus will be popular".
> Now, and before it happens such policy just forces people to create
> patches, non-standard builds of libshout which basically just adding
> unnecessary overhead.
> m.
> 2013/6/24 Thomas Rücker <thomas.ruecker at tieto.com>
>> Just going to drop my 0,02€ here too.
>> On 24 June 2013 16:47, Daniel James <daniel.james at sourcefabric.org>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi Greg,
>> >
>> >> The open source AAC/HE-AAC encoders offer pretty poor audio quality.
>> >> Sometimes you really do get what you pay for, and this is a perfect
>> example.
>> >
>> > An alternative explanation might be that open source developers were not
>> > particularly motivated to work on improving AAC encoders, because of
>> > difficulties experienced when trying to distribute patent-encumbered
>> code.
>> This is at least the explanation why the earlier sent patch by Paul is
>> unlikely to get merged in mainline libshout, as helpful and valuable
>> it might be for some people. We encourage open and patent-problem-free
>> formats.
>> Especially now that with Opus there is a codec, that can at the least
>> match the AAC/HE-AAC efficiency and has already gained main-stream
>> browser support with Firefox, Opera and Chrome probably soon to join.
>> Also it's one of the WebRTC codecs and as such will see further
>> adoption.
>> Cheers
>> Thomas
>> _______________________________________________
>> Icecast-dev mailing list
>> Icecast-dev at xiph.org
>> http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/icecast-dev
> _______________________________________________
> Icecast-dev mailing list
> Icecast-dev at xiph.org
> http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/icecast-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/icecast-dev/attachments/20130624/0619ecf6/attachment.htm 

More information about the Icecast-dev mailing list