Jump to content

sample of 48kbit music

Rate this topic


RobA

Recommended Posts

It's just bad. Dont' bother. The only good use for it is probably voice recording.

If you want, you can encode your own with SS2.x and up.

I couldn't tell any difference between 66kbit and an original CD. How much different can it be? Only want a sample.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 kbps is a regular MD format.

Do it yourself: Put a CD in your CD drive. Open Sonic Stage. Tools/Convert Format. Under OpenMG AtRAC3plus choose 48kbps. (While you're at it, uncheck the copy protection.) You can convert the same track at any bitrate you want for comparisons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, here it is as a .wav (converted through Marcnet's invaluable Hi-MDRenderer). .wav is uncompressed, so it's a big sample for 24 seconds of music.

What are you playing music through? Windows Media Player? Winamp? Real Player? iTunes?

Any of them should have already been able to play .wav without a plugin.

And how are you listening? Headphones plugged into your computer?

Standard computer soundcards are not known for high-fidelity reproduction and headphones can be great or not so great. What you may be hearing in any sample is the limitations of your soundcard or your headphones.

Generally, the bitrate is not the only thing that matters. mp3 at 128 kbps sounds different from wma at 128 kpbs or ATRAC (.oma) at 128 (well, 132) kpbs because each codec compresses different sounds in different ways. Lower bitrate means lower quality within each codec, but codec designers try to leave out whatever they think you don't need to hear, so some codecs may strike your ear as more musical than others.

The question you're trying to answer is not whether music at 66 or 48 kbps sounds good, but whether ATRAC at 66 kbps or 48 kbps sounds good.

By the way, can you copy the link to the FAQ?

La_Grange_48.wav

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, here it is as a .wav (converted through Marcnet's invaluable Hi-MDRenderer). .wav is uncompressed, so it's a big sample for 24 seconds of music.

What are you playing music through? Windows Media Player? Winamp? Real Player? iTunes?

Any of them should have already been able to play .wav without a plugin.

And how are you listening? Headphones plugged into your computer?

Standard computer soundcards are not known for high-fidelity reproduction and headphones can be great or not so great. What you may be hearing in any sample is the limitations of your soundcard or your headphones.

Generally, the bitrate is not the only thing that matters. mp3 at 128 kbps sounds different from wma at 128 kpbs or ATRAC (.oma) at 128 (well, 132) kpbs because each codec compresses different sounds in different ways. Lower bitrate means lower quality within each codec, but codec designers try to leave out whatever they think you don't need to hear, so some codecs may strike your ear as more musical than others.

The question you're trying to answer is not whether music at 66 or 48 kbps sounds good, but whether ATRAC at 66 kbps or 48 kbps sounds good.

By the way, can you copy the link to the FAQ?

Here it is: http://minidisc.org/mdlpfaq.html#_q73

I downloaded the required plugin then downloaded the 66kbps file to listen to it through winamp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^

that link is pretty old... as you're interested in knowing about atrac(3+) bitrate's SQ and you have already ordered the NH600 (I believe), why not just install SS3.2 from the downloads section and you can compare all available bitrates (read the manual from the NH600 or from any other first gen 'NH' HiMD model to see which bitrates are compatible with the NH600) and use some difficult/complex music you love and some good gear (preferably the phones you will use with the NH600) to test it for yourself...

no use in using only this old and awkward test material, especially when you got to install the SS software anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^

that link is pretty old... as you're interested in knowing about atrac(3+) bitrate's SQ and you have already ordered the NH600 (I believe), why not just install SS3.2 from the downloads section and you can compare all available bitrates (read the manual from the NH600 or from any other first gen 'NH' HiMD model to see which bitrates are compatible with the NH600) and use some difficult/complex music you love and some good gear (preferably the phones you will use with the NH600) to test it for yourself...

no use in using only this old and awkward test material, especially when you got to install the SS software anyway

I'll check it out when I recieve the 600D. I'm ordering it on Sunday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll check it out when I recieve the 600D. I'm ordering it on Sunday.

good, but really no need to wait, the software bundled with the NH600D is SS2.0 so you should install 3.2 anyway... you could do it right now so you have something to have fun with until the NH600D arrives

as for the manual, just follow this link or download it at the minidisc.org equipment browser

BTW: the NH600D can play the same formats as my NH900 so

- PCM

- atrac3+ @ 265/64/48

- atrac3 @ 132/105/66

(- atrac @ 292 = SP but as the NH600D is a downloader only you can't use it to create real SP, so not really useful)

have fun

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...