>>840166The bitrate isn't enough to make you think "fucking whoa, OMFG, this hnew format can make a song sound like god at 1 MB in file size when MP3 has to be 6 MB to sound just as good".
Shit isn't like that aac is like only a bit better and most people aren't sitting there with scientist equipment and sound proof rooms to figure out which one sounds better at 96 kbps. They just stick on the fucking safe side and pick 256/320 kbps and take the 6-9 mb per song no matter what format they choose. Storage has grown big enough to where trying to shave 1 mb off every fucking song isn't even going to help you that much. We needed aac when my hdd was only 320 GB.
>>840170>and mp3 somehowYeah, this is where you denial shows. "somehow" magically mp3 is still supported. It can't possibly be because its' still the standard.
ok, screw even using the word "standard". forget I used that.
I will say mp3 is still much more popular and more widely supported. I googled aac vs mp3 in googled and spend a couple minutes clicking articles to see what they said about support and they all seem to agree with what I'm saying, so I'm going to stick with what I'm saying and they are saying as opposed to what you anon(s)? are saying.
