Quality: Simple Burner VS. SonicStage?

[phish]

I just got MZ-NH1, jumping from MZ-RXX series (non-NetMD) to HiMD era.

I installed all software, Simple Burner and SonicStage. Both can trasnfer

music files to HiMD-I do only in Hi-SP mode. Is there any sound quality

differences between Simple Buner and SonicStage?

Transfered HiSP is real HiSP? I'm just curious since NetMD SP is not real SP

if the file transfered by USB cable. Same rule applied to HiSP?

Thanks.

[Bananatree]

Unless you used some super sensitive material for testing, I doubt you'd ever be able to test it fairly.

As far as I know, everything about Simple Burner matches up with SonicStage. The only difference is that sonicstage will import your CD song by song, leave it on you HDD and then transfer.

[streaml1ne]

Probably not since they likely use the same dll's for encoding.

[phish]

Thank you. I couldn't get catch the sonic difference either.

Well, I tested

- PCM in HiMD mode

- Hi-SP in HiMD mode

- SP in MD mode

Recording via optical digital for SP in MD mode and PCM in HiMD.

For HiSP, I used SonicStage 2.2.

Media is SONY ES.

Maybe my ears aren't that sensitive. Anyway I couldn't notice any big

difference. What you think of?

[xeroxide]

I couldn't tell the difference.

although, i wasn't expecting any...

[Sony_Fan]

I couldn't tell the difference.

although, i wasn't expecting any...

With SS 3.4, it has a "high" recording setting. Simple Burner does not, so it leads me to believe that SS 3.4 actually gives better sound quality. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[ZosoIV]

With SS 3.4, it has a "high" recording setting. Simple Burner does not, so it leads me to believe that SS 3.4 actually gives better sound quality. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Given such switches in other CD-ripping programs, I halfway wonder if the "high" and "normal" settings don't have anything to do with the encoder, but rather, with the ripping protocol. Since it is only offered for CD, it leads me to believe that it is controlling for drive speed and/or rip accuracy, perhaps using a slower or extra careful extraction process for the "high" switch.

There is a way to settle this question: rip a track using Hi-SP with both the normal and high settings, and then encode the same track from a wav file ripped in another program. Do a bit-compare on the files. If they all match up, the "high" and "normal" switches probably have to do with the CD extraction process; if they do not match, it at least opens up the possibility that the encoder is acting differently. It would be especially interesting to compare the "high' rip with a wav-encoded file.

[Qwakrz]

I think the main differences can be summed up with

SB is used for a quick copy of a CD to a Hi-MD/NetMD device.

SS is used for the storage and manipulation of Hi-MD audio files.

[MDGB2]

With SS 3.4, it has a "high" recording setting. Simple Burner does not, so it leads me to believe that SS 3.4 actually gives better sound quality. Correct me if I'm wrong.

A little radio button on a computer screen with "high" on it does not necessarily mean better.

Hell, if you want real quality record in real-time via the optical cable.

[Sony_Fan]

I think the main differences can be summed up with

SB is used for a quick copy of a CD to a Hi-MD/NetMD device.

SS is used for the storage and manipulation of Hi-MD audio files.

I think you're right. I ripped a song in 3 different ways:

1.) Simple Burner Hi-SP

2.) SS 3.4 ATRAC3plus "normal" Hi-SP

3.) SS 3.4 ATRAC3plus "high" Hi-SP. All 3 songs were the same size after encoding: 7,274,496 bytes. Is this proof that all 3 songs were encoded equally and with the same sound quality?

Edited April 2, 2006 by Chris G

[ZosoIV]

I think you're right. I ripped a song in 3 different ways:

1.) Simple Burner Hi-SP

2.) SS 3.4 ATRAC3plus "normal" Hi-SP

3.) SS 3.4 ATRAC3plus "high" Hi-SP. All 3 songs were the same size after encoding: 7,274,496 bytes. Is this proof that all 3 songs were encoded equally and with the same sound quality?

No, because each song is encoded at 256kbps CBR, meaning that any song of that exact length will come out to be the same size, no matter if you encode it with SS, SB, etc. If the encoder is really doing something different, however, the files will be different internally (i.e., have slightly different data values but the same overall size). You'd have to compare them with a bit-comparison program (there should be free ones available online) as stated earlier.

[Sony_Fan]

Given such switches in other CD-ripping programs, I halfway wonder if the "high" and "normal" settings don't have anything to do with the encoder, but rather, with the ripping protocol. Since it is only offered for CD, it leads me to believe that it is controlling for drive speed and/or rip accuracy, perhaps using a slower or extra careful extraction process for the "high" switch.

There is a way to settle this question: rip a track using Hi-SP with both the normal and high settings, and then encode the same track from a wav file ripped in another program. Do a bit-compare on the files. If they all match up, the "high" and "normal" switches probably have to do with the CD extraction process; if they do not match, it at least opens up the possibility that the encoder is acting differently. It would be especially interesting to compare the "high' rip with a wav-encoded file.

I also noticed that when ripping with SS 3.4 using ATRAC3plus Hi-SP with the "high" setting, it takes almost twice as long to rip a CD than it would if you used the "normal" setting. So maybe it is just ripping it slower to prevent errors and it's not enhancing sound quality.

[pata2001]

Given such switches in other CD-ripping programs, I halfway wonder if the "high" and "normal" settings don't have anything to do with the encoder, but rather, with the ripping protocol. Since it is only offered for CD, it leads me to believe that it is controlling for drive speed and/or rip accuracy, perhaps using a slower or extra careful extraction process for the "high" switch.

Hmm, if that's the case, then how come there's no such option when you choose LP2/Atrac3 compression? Weird huh? Sony doesn't really explain the otion either.

[Sony_Fan]

Hmm, if that's the case, then how come there's no such option when you choose LP2/Atrac3 compression? Weird huh? Sony doesn't really explain the otion either.

That's true, there is no "high" setting for ATRAC3. But there is a "high" setting for MP3 encoding. Does anyone know exactly what the "high" setting does?

[1kyle]

That's true, there is no "high" setting for ATRAC3. But there is a "high" setting for MP3 encoding. Does anyone know exactly what the "high" setting does?

SS 3.4 gives you more Bitrates for transferring to MD than SB does for example SS can transfer to MD @ 352 / 320 kbs compared with a maximum of 256 when using SB.

PCM transfer is another issue of course.

Now whether you can actually HEAR the difference between 256, 320 and 352 is something only your own ears can tell.

For most purposes I'd think that HI-SP @ 256 is usually more than sufficient --especially for music "On the Move".

SB gives you the advantage that you DON'T have to store the music on your computer first, however you might well want to keep music on your computer.

I don't think at 256 kbs there would be ANY difference in using SB or SS 3.4 so long as you've stored the music on your computer in either Atrac Advanced Lossless or PCM (WAV).

If you have already compressed (lossy) the music in SS then you will have another loss due to another generation of encoding before transferring to MD so in this case SB will be better as there's no extra transcoding loss.

Cheers

-K

[Sony_Fan]

SS 3.4 gives you more Bitrates for transferring to MD than SB does for example SS can transfer to MD @ 352 / 320 kbs compared with a maximum of 256 when using SB.

PCM transfer is another issue of course.

Now whether you can actually HEAR the difference between 256, 320 and 352 is something only your own ears can tell.

For most purposes I'd think that HI-SP @ 256 is usually more than sufficient --especially for music "On the Move".

SB gives you the advantage that you DON'T have to store the music on your computer first, however you might well want to keep music on your computer.

I don't think at 256 kbs there would be ANY difference in using SB or SS 3.4 so long as you've stored the music on your computer in either Atrac Advanced Lossless or PCM (WAV).

If you have already compressed (lossy) the music in SS then you will have another loss due to another generation of encoding before transferring to MD so in this case SB will be better as there's no extra transcoding loss.

Cheers

-K

You didn't explain what the "High" setting does in SS 3.4. That's the main question here.

[Richard]

You didn't explain what the "High" setting does in SS 3.4. That's the main question here.

Well I think we are all generally agreed that it reduces the chances of read-errors when ripping from CD. The online help doesn't say much, but this seems to be the general consensus.

[1kyle]

I don't think it actually does anything -- at least on my machine it doesn't seem to.

It's possible that these settings just set the "optimisation" for running the conversions.

Without decoding the program I don't think this actually does anything. For example these settings still exist if you use Atrac Advanced Lossless. Now in my book a Lossless encoding is LOSSLESS so settings like "High" or "Low" are irrelevant or meaningless.

It's just possible that this could be part of a "New Interface" for say SS 3.5 or 4.0 if this ever appears.

Cheers

-K

[Sony_Fan]

Well I think we are all generally agreed that it reduces the chances of read-errors when ripping from CD. The online help doesn't say much, but this seems to be the general consensus.

I've tried chatting with a Sony rep about it and they don't know what it is either. The only way to find out is if we ask one of the software engineers of SonicStage. But I'm starting to think that the "high" setting is probably just to prevent read errors. My DVD burning software has a similar setting and it helps to prevent read erros when copying a DVD. I guess that makes sense.

Edited April 3, 2006 by Chris G

[mmp64]

I've tried chatting with a Sony rep about it and they don't know what it is either. The only way to find out is if we ask one of the software engineers of SonicStage. But I'm starting to think that the "high" setting is probably just to prevent read errors. My DVD burning software has a similar setting and it helps to prevent read erros when copying a DVD. I guess that makes sense.

Yes, I agree. Based on my understanding of similar features in previous versions of SS - I think ATRAC3+ 256 is ATRAC3+ 256 - there is no difference in audio quality between "high" and "normal." I think they mean that there is more of a possibility for a read error with "normal" because there is no, or less error correction than with the high setting. By definition, a read error would produce a "lower quality" file <i.e. - a click, or skip, or whatever>. I do not think it means that, for example, the cymbals sound crisper. I would chalk it up to a less than optimal translation from the original Japanese.