2

Lower than AAC 96kbps audio bitrate

Why isn't it possible to set audio AAC bitrate to less than 96kbps through the encoder preset ?

24replies Oldest first
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Active threads
  • Popular
  • Please do explain further.

    Screenshot from Wirecast 9.0.1

     

     

     

    Like
  • But I only have these 馃槾

    Like
  • Scherring Chong I'm seeing that as well on Windows. Given your other settings it looks like you're trying to stream in a low bandwidth situation.
    Is that the case?
    Keep in mind that a very low bit rate is likely to be very poor audio quality.
    Can you explain why you'd want to go below 96kbps for audio?

    Like
  • We are planning to livestream to large number of users, e.g. > 5000. With 96kbps, it requires a bandwidth capacity around 100kbps / user. Then for 5000 users, it requires around 500Mbps. This would cost us too much to provision such a huge bandwidth capacity. This is why we need to cut down the quality. Since we are only streaming conversations, not music, quality doesn't matter too much in our case.

    Like
  • Scherring Chong Thanks for that description. It's a very clear use case example for the need.

    I'd think the optimal combination would be switching to mono and possibly using a lower sample rate as well (such as 32kHz) which might actually help the quality while maintaining a lower bit rate. Lower sample rates need fewer bits.

    Fill out the form and include your use case example as a feature request. You may want to ask for lower sample rate as well.
    Wirecast Feature Request Form

    Like
  • Scherring Chong 

    Scherring Chong said:
    We are planning to livestream to large number of users, e.g. > 5000. With 96kbps, it requires a bandwidth capacity around 100kbps / user. Then for 5000 users, it requires around 500Mbps.

     Scherring Chong  - Where are your users? Are they internal to your organisation using an intranet, or is this a public stream? If it is public - you should not care about the bandwidth. If it is internal, perhaps you could investigate an internal RTSP server solution, to stream via an internal resource.

    Share some more examples of what you are doing - and there might be other ideas...

    Like
  • Greg Kuhnert 

     

    They are public users. We are streaming to them using HLS under HTTPS which is chosen for universal access. This is why bandwidth matters. 

     

    Is there any reason why the lower bitrate feature not available on windows?

    Like
  • Hi Scherring Chong .

    I understand you are streaming to general public users, using HLS over HTTPS. I assume therefore you are building your own streaming server(s), and trying to reduce bandwidth to decrease your infrastructure cost.

    Have you considered alternatives - of using other services to do the streaming, and embedding that in your presentation layer? At the moment, you are trying to reduce bandwidth per session. However, you still have a linear growth problem. Each new user you add is your problem. If you use a CDN, you can move that problem somewhere else. You could integrate authentication back to your servers if required for end users.

    Why is lower bitrate not available on Windows? Dont know. I don't use windows, and I don't work for Telestream. 

    :)

    Like
  • Scherring Chong said:
    Is there any reason why the lower bitrate feature not available on windows?

     There may be some history to that but I don't want to speculate. Of course if the developers accept the feature request that difference may not be there in the future which is more important than the past. Keep in mind if this is a rare request that may impact priority. Along the lines of Greg's comments, the developers may feel Greg's recommendations are the common path forward. If you have decided against that, the developers will need to understand your reasoning to determine that there may be others in your situation.

    Like
  • Scherring Chong said:
    They are public users. We are streaming to them using HLS under HTTPS which is chosen for universal access. This is why bandwidth matters.

     To clarify this and in regards to Greg's comments, these days almost all CDNs offer to take an RTMP stream and convert it to HLS. I believe many CDNs are now doing this by default.

    Like
  • I don't think using a CDN will make it a lot cheaper because these companies exist to make money and they all charge per GB transferred. I will end up paying more than necessary, even using CDN, because I need to transfer more data since I cannot lower the bitrate. I can offload my problem to them, but not my cost. Sending the least amount of data is the only way to cut down the cost.

    This problem extends negatively when my users use the mobile network (3/4G) to listen to my stream because they too need to pay extra for the extra data transferred.

    I will submit this feature request right after this. Please expedite this if you have any influence over the developers' decision.

    Like
  • Scherring Chong said:
    I don't think using a CDN will make it a lot cheaper because these companies exist to make money and they all charge per GB transferred.

     So one really simple example that would not have a cost impact is youtube. If you are charging for content, make it an unlisted stream. If it is sensitive content, do a private stream and require a login. You can still embed that in a website or in your own apps... and fix your bandwidth problem.

    And regarding your users bandwidth for audio - that portion is relatively insignificant at a single user level. The big bandwidth impact is the video resolution - which will be under their control if they use something like youtube.

    GK

    Like
  • You are right. Youtube is free but sadly it is totally blocked in China. We want our stream to be available in China so Youtube is not an option.

    We don't stream video. Our program is a talk show which doesn't have video content. Therefore, the audio part of the stream is significant to us. If we can reduce the bitrate, we can save half of the bandwidth required.

    Like
  • Scherring Chong Would Youku work for you?

    Like
  • I'd rather having everything on my own servers.

    Like
  • Scherring Chong The developers may need to consider the interest in this given the potential circumstance. You may want to follow up by email with your case number explaining that there might be others interested in this and why.

    Like
  • I second the request to bring back the lower bitrates in Windows.   We run webcasts over a corporate network, and tend to run video and audio bitrates much lower than typical for broadcast to get as much out of our network bandwidth.  Even attempting to select mono still presents 96k as the lowest option!  At a minimum, a mono stream ought to have 48k available.  

    Like
  • David Wilkins Fill out the previously posted Feature Request Form explaining why you need it and reference this forum thread so the can see the interest from other users as well.

    Like
  • CraigS Form filled out.  I hope something can be done.  We consider this a breaking change from our previous Wirecast version, which is blocking me from upgrading our encoders until I find a solution.  The issue seems to have existed since v8. 

    Like
  • David Wilkins Lower settings were available before 8? Make sure you let the developers know that.

    Like
  • Craig I see this is over a year old and is not fixed to allow lower AAC bitrates. To convert the AAC to Opus we need 64kbps @48000hz. Otherwise Wirecast is unusable for us. It is only the menus that are broken because if an old document v6 is launched it will work with lower settings but this is precarious in a production environment and limits that value of the upgraded wirecast for implementing other features in V13 we like. Why can't this easily return to how it was in V6 an quickly?

    Like
  • Tyler said:
    Craig I see this is over a year old and is not fixed to allow lower AAC bitrates.

    It's possible that on the Windows side there's a license or technical issue which doesn't exist on the Mac.

    You'll have to fill out the previously posted feature request and ask for a status update. You can certainly post the response here. It's important that you explain why you need it as well.

    Like
  • I've also submitted this feature request. Devs please make this possible for Windows 10.

    Like
  • Joseph Lau At the moment, the encoder development software limits due to licensing. We're investigating that.

    Like
Like2 Follow
  • 2 Likes
  • 1 yr agoLast active
  • 24Replies
  • 583Views
  • 6 Following