International organisation for standardisation

Discussion

Gregory Pallone, Orange Labs, and TaeJin LEE, ETRI, took the position that the Extended HE-AAC Profile is not necessary, since it would be sufficient to describe a decoder as conforming to both HE-AAC V2 Profile and Baseline USAC Profile. Gregory Pallone, Orange Labs, asked several times why the USAC baseline and HE-AACv2 were not sufficient. He stated that, in his opinion, he did not obtain an clear answer to this question. He further asked if the only difference between this profile proposal and the similar one from the 96^th MPEG meeting relies is this: instead of referencing two profiles from two standards (MPEG-D USAC baseline and MPEG-4 HE-AACv2), the current proposal is defied as a set of MPEG-4 AOT’s. This was confirmed.

Gregory Pallone, Orange Labs, stated that the new profile is not a “Natural Evolution” of HE-AACv2 since USAC is not a module as were SBR and PS, but rather a new codec. He further stated that he only heard marketing reasons to adopt this profile (no technical evidence).

Bernhard Grill, FhG, noted that, as a technical motivation, USAC is truly an evolution of the HE-AAC V2 Profile decoder. Kristofer Kjorling, Dolby, noted that, as a marketing motivation, there are several companies that have requested this profile, which is fully sufficient reason to adopt the profile.

Jeff Huang, Qualcomm, noted that the profile name does not include “USAC.” Kristofer Kjorling, Dolby, noted that HE-AAC V2 does not include mention of SBR or PS tools, and therefore he sees no reason to include USAC in the profile name.

Bernhard Grill, FhG and Kristofer Kjorling, Dolby, noted that Orange Labs is free to not use the Extended HE-AAC Profile, and feel that it is not appropriate for Orange Labs or ETRI to block the proposed profile.

When the audio chair asked if it was the consensus to adopt the proposed profile, Jeff Huang, Qualcomm, said he had concerns about the name. Gregory Pallone, Orange Labs, added that if the proposition would be accepted, then he also had concerns that the name should minimize any confusion in the marketplace.

Gregory Pallone, Orange Labs, proposed an alternate name: “USAC Extended AAC Profile.” Werner Oomen, Philips, felt that the acronym “USAC” does not convey much meaning. Kristofer Kjorling, Dolby and Heiko Purnhagen, Dolby, expressed the view that Extended HE-AAC Profile is already a fairly long name and that “there is a beauty in simplicity.” Bernhard Grill, FhG, expressed an interest in a new name for USAC, which might lead to new profile names. The Chair encouraged Audio experts to spend the time between now and the next MPEG meeting think of possible new and better names for USAC, which might be able to be used in profile names and in the name of the standard itself.

After considerable additional discussion, it was clear to the Chair that the stated positions of experts would not change, even with more discussion. The two experts, Gregory Pallone, Orange Labs, and TaeJin LEE, ETRI, sustained their position of not supporting the Extended HE-AAC Profile. Nevertheless, the vast majority of Audio experts did support the positions proposed in the contribution.

The Chair declared that it was the consensus of the Audio subgroup to adopt the USAC Baseline Profile and the Extended HE-ACC Profile, as defined in the contribution, into the USAC FDIS text.