Jump to content

132kbps ATRAC3 or 128kbps ATRAC3plus?

Rate this topic


sonyk

Recommended Posts

I've always converted and transferred my mp3 collection as 132kbps ATRAC3 files, but a friend said that I should use ATRAC3plus at 128kbps as the sound quality is better despite the higher file compression.

Is this true? I thought that the only difference between ATRAC3 and ATRAC3plus was the different bitrates?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the HD5 supports 128kbps, so if you rip your music to 128kbps Atrac3+, you would have to transcode to a supported bitrate, resulting in worsening quality.

Besides, the HD5 supports MP3, so I would just transfer the MP3s as is. Why bother transcoding to Atrac?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the HD5 supports 128kbps, so if you rip your music to 128kbps Atrac3+, you would have to transcode to a supported bitrate, resulting in worsening quality.

Besides, the HD5 supports MP3, so I would just transfer the MP3s as is. Why bother transcoding to Atrac?

The HD5 does support 128kbps at ATRAC3 and I use ATRAC because of better battery life and smaller file sizes...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If u properly go through manual of NW-E505 sony has marked the battery life for different format like MP3 40 hours But the thing is ATRAC3(50 Hours) & ATRAC3 PLUS(45 hours) .This purely tell us that Artac3 is more battery friendly then atrac3 plus

ANY COMMENTS..........

Edited by Stuge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...