ROMBUSTERS Posted March 7, 2005 Report Share Posted March 7, 2005 First off there is no way to use lossless compression on a HiMD device at current time. PCM is your only option for true uncompressed sound. However I had an idea the other day. Especially with the advent of SonicStage 3.0 and the ability to transcode a file several times this occured to me.Instead of ripping your CDs in Atrac3+ HiSP 256kbps highest bit rate mode and then transcoding into a lower one (if that is how you wish to do this) later (without requiring the CD again) why not go from lossless to whatever you wish to convert?Open up Windows Media Player 9 or 10 and rip your CDs in Windows Media Lossless. Then import them into SonicStage. It can handle it. From there when you go to transfer your songs choose your bit rate and let it convert it on the fly (only has to be done once if you keep the delete converted files afterwards box unchecked).That way you can get the very best sound quality possible without having to go back to the source CD.My 2 cents Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daremo Posted March 7, 2005 Report Share Posted March 7, 2005 Interesting... Have you tried this yet? Since Ive imported all my CDs in HiSP, moving them to an MD in that format does not require any more converting. But I could see this being an issue if you used NetMD and only had the option of going from HiSP to LP2 or LP4... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted March 7, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 7, 2005 Interesting... Have you tried this yet? Since Ive imported all my CDs in HiSP, moving them to an MD in that format does not require any more converting. But I could see this being an issue if you used NetMD and only had the option of going from HiSP to LP2 or LP4...←ya ive tried this and it works perfectly. However i dont keep my files in WML (i use HiSP like you, because id prefer not to have to rencode again).but i thought about this after i ripped them (although WML does take quote a bit more HDD space then HiSP does) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zerodB Posted March 7, 2005 Report Share Posted March 7, 2005 Yep, I'm just starting to do this. Sure WML isn't the best lossless codec around, but it works. It's the best of both worlds - I enjoy uncompressed music on my PC (and I can easily convert WML to WAV when need be) and I then enjoy LP2 tracks on my Md. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeriyn Posted March 7, 2005 Report Share Posted March 7, 2005 SonicSludge understands WML?Lossless codecs are not better or worse than any other ones. ALAC is not better than FLAC is not better than Monkey's Audio is not better than WML. They don't throw anything away, so the signal is the same no matter what. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Tires Posted March 7, 2005 Report Share Posted March 7, 2005 Are there any PCDPs or MP3/DAPs that recognize WML yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeriyn Posted March 7, 2005 Report Share Posted March 7, 2005 Are there any PCDPs or MP3/DAPs that recognize WML yet?←As far as I know, nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tony wong Posted March 7, 2005 Report Share Posted March 7, 2005 (edited) SonicSludge understands WML?Lossless codecs are not better or worse than any other ones. ALAC is not better than FLAC is not better than Monkey's Audio is not better than WML. They don't throw anything away, so the signal is the same no matter what.←aeriyn, glad to see u backthere are so much things I have learnt from uso many thank you for u [added] in red, always miss out the most important word! Edited March 7, 2005 by tony wong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROMBUSTERS Posted March 7, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 7, 2005 Lossless codecs are not better or worse than any other ones. ALAC is not better than FLAC is not better than Monkey's Audio is not better than WML. They don't throw anything away, so the signal is the same no matter what.←he might have meant that it doesnt compress as well as others. They all do the same job but some do it more efficiently then others Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zerodB Posted March 8, 2005 Report Share Posted March 8, 2005 Yep, that's what I meant. Some codecs compress better, and are faster too.Aparently WML is the slowest of them all. Still, as cori pointed out, it's all lossless at the end of the day. The good thing about WML is that it is understood by most audio playing software. FLAC, etc. often requires additional plugins.As far as I know no DAPs or other devices support WML. And also, as far as I know, know DAPs can play back Windows Media gaplessly, even though it can be done gaplessly on the PC... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.