comspec Posted June 4, 2005 Report Share Posted June 4, 2005 The more I listen to ATRAC3plus @ 64k, the more I like it. Comparing my NH900 to my new RH10... w/tracks encoded the aforementioned format... the RH10 sounds pretty darned good.My question is this: I'm considering converting my ATRAC3 @ 132k library files to ATRAC3plus @ 64k. Is this advisable, or should I re-rip all these CD's using the new format?Tnx one and all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breepee2 Posted June 4, 2005 Report Share Posted June 4, 2005 Rerip if possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Posted June 4, 2005 Report Share Posted June 4, 2005 Scratch all that and go with 256kbps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breepee2 Posted June 4, 2005 Report Share Posted June 4, 2005 kurisu, I agree with whole my hart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_THE_CROW Posted June 5, 2005 Report Share Posted June 5, 2005 only use WAV (PCM).... its the best... re-rip from your AUDIO CDs to WAV... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Breepee2 Posted June 5, 2005 Report Share Posted June 5, 2005 Rip them to FLAC (or WMA Lossless for SonicStage compatibility) to save 55% and have tags on your music.Too bad Sony has no lossless codec ala FLAC for the MD. Using pcm for recording is fine (is easy on its cpu), but for playback a lossless format would be very nice. With pcm you throw 45% away, for nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Low Volta Posted June 5, 2005 Report Share Posted June 5, 2005 Too bad Sony has no lossless codec ala FLAC for the MD. Using pcm for recording is fine (is easy on its cpu), but for playback a lossless format would be very nice. With pcm you throw 45% away, for nothing.←I'll second that, but in the meantime:-256bps for playback & speech recording-PCM for music recording Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwakrz Posted June 5, 2005 Report Share Posted June 5, 2005 Ok,I have ripped all my CD's (slow going) into 256K AT3+ and let SS convert them down on the fly. The drawback is when converting down you will get occasional blips between tracks as the frame sizes are different and it seems that SS converts on a frame by frame basis and not decode then recode.The above, however, works fine for me and I dont notice to much lost quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrsoul Posted June 5, 2005 Report Share Posted June 5, 2005 I'll second that, but in the meantime:-256bps for playback & speech recording-PCM for music recording←Then again, Hi-SP when you don't want to worry about changing MDs when you are stealth recording music IS the way to go... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1kyle Posted June 5, 2005 Report Share Posted June 5, 2005 (edited) only use WAV (PCM).... its the best... re-rip from your AUDIO CDs to WAV...←For about 99% of environments where I'm listening to MD's AT3+ @256 is almost indistinguishable from PCM and saves a lot of HD space on your computer.Until High end Shelf type HI-MD units appear I wouldn't bother with PCM --especially if you are ripping CD's. I'm not saying PCM isn't better --but the "incremental" increase in quality at this time doesn't seem worth the extra effort and disk space of doing it.In any case as no current HI-MD units have an optical out so if you are playing into a high end piece of gear the line out (analog) is a limiting factor so the extra information in a PCM signal will be wasted.In case you are using PCM only to avoid all the DRM crap -- provided you only use "Non Purchased downloaded" music i.e you have only "ripped CD's" in your library then there is actually no problem in copying the library to as many computers as you want -- I've got a post elsewhere on these boards about how to do this and the limitations.As soon (if ever) HI-MD units with an optical out or high quality shelf HI-MD units appear then I'll re-rip everything to PCM.At the current state of the art for ripping CD's AT3+ @ 256K is more than sufficient.(For recording your OWN music --then different criteria apply -- I'm addressing this post to the vast majority who simply just rip CD's for portable music listening).Cheers-K Edited June 5, 2005 by 1kyle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmp64 Posted June 5, 2005 Report Share Posted June 5, 2005 The more I listen to ATRAC3plus @ 64k, the more I like it. Comparing my NH900 to my new RH10... w/tracks encoded the aforementioned format... the RH10 sounds pretty darned good.My question is this: I'm considering converting my ATRAC3 @ 132k library files to ATRAC3plus @ 64k. Is this advisable, or should I re-rip all these CD's using the new format?Tnx one and all. ←IMHO - if you are OK w/ HiLP (64k) - then you would probably be OK just downsampling on-the-fly from LP2 (132k). I wouldn't bother re-ripping. But I would suggest doing some tests - downsampled vs. re-ripped, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDGB2 Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Assuming you're after more music on a disc, why not re-rip to Atrac3 105kbps?From a few listens it seems to be very close to LP2 (132kbps) and will get a few more hours out of the disc.Cheers. 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.