7seas Posted June 17, 2006 Report Share Posted June 17, 2006 I used to rip my CD's at cbr 320kbps.I've read about ripping to the atrac3 format will reduce my filesize by 50%.Is there somebody who can tell me at wich bitrate i have to rip in atrac3 to have te same quality as my mp3 file at 320kbps cbr?thx7seas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 pata2001 Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 Save yourself the headache, and just rip to MP3. Unless you require gapless playback, there is no advantage in ripping to Atrac. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Stuge Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 No,Filesize will be same for same bitrates(for same length of song) whether it is WMA,MP3 or Atrac. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Ascariss Posted June 18, 2006 Report Share Posted June 18, 2006 stick to mp3 unless you want gapless, or better battery life at lower bitrates, ie 132 or 66 atrac3+ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 imhambone Posted December 15, 2006 Report Share Posted December 15, 2006 I would advise you to use VBR instead of CBR. Here is a quote from a user on the Winamp forums - I had a similar question.-----------------------------Winamp uses the Lame encoder. Your setting VBR New is correct, but you should choose Joint Stereo. Forcing Stereo will create larger files with no perceptable difference in channel seperation. Joint Stereo allows for material common on both channels to be encoded only once. By choosing 192 kbs as both the minimum and maximum bitrate you are basically forcing CBR. You can safely lower the minimun bitrate down to 96kbs or lower and raise your maximum to 320 kbs. These settings allow the encoder the flexibility to select the most appropriate rate for each sample. A Quality setting of 2 will create roughly the same size files as CBR 192, the difference being CBR keeps file size the same with varying quality. VBR keeps the quality the same while file sizes vary.----------------------------Hope it helps.Regards,J Hampton- Freedom isn't free Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 DannyB37 Posted December 15, 2006 Report Share Posted December 15, 2006 If you want to get the most out of mp3 look here.http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=LAME Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 navsimpson Posted December 15, 2006 Report Share Posted December 15, 2006 Do keep in mind that using ATRAC versus MP3 at the same bitrate will give you better battery life i.e. ATRAC 256 will give you better battery life than MP3 256. Like many others have stated, that's the only reason I haven't re-ripped my collection in LAME...I wish Sony would tweak ATRAC3+, or even create an 'ATRAC4' that had better-than-LAME sound quality.... ah well.-Nav Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 RobA Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 Definitely convert to ATRAC3plus. It is actually proven that ATRAC3plus 64kbps sounds BETTER than MP3 128kbps just slightly.If you want mp3 320kbps, you would probably be best with ATRAC3plus 256kbps. Although lower bitrates sound great with ATRAC3plus. I play all my music at 64kbps, boosts battery life too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 imhambone Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 <It is actually proven that ATRAC3plus 64kbps sounds BETTER than MP3 128kbpsWhere was this proven? Can you provide a web link or other info? I have heard other opinions as well.Best Regards,J Hampton- Freedom isn't free-------------------------If you can read this, thank a teacher.If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 pata2001 Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 Definitely convert to ATRAC3plus. It is actually proven that ATRAC3plus 64kbps sounds BETTER than MP3 128kbps just slightly.Says who, Sony? That's sound a lot like MS, when they claimed their 64kbps WMA is equal to MP3 128kbps. Although Atrac3+ 64kbps is decent, it's not worth the hassle re-rip/transcoding everything. It's a waste of time, time that you can use to actually listen to the music instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 DSP Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 if I have a CD that I would like to have on my Walkman,then I'll always rip it t atrac3+, but If I have some MP3's to put on my Walkman I won't convert them because I think that converting from one lossy format to another lossy format is nothing but evil to the soundquality. but all in all, I love atrac. allthough PCM rules (doh) and LAME is very good too greetz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 RobA Posted December 17, 2006 Report Share Posted December 17, 2006 (edited) <It is actually proven that ATRAC3plus 64kbps sounds BETTER than MP3 128kbpsWhere was this proven? Can you provide a web link or other info? I have heard other opinions as well.Best Regards,J Hampton- Freedom isn't free-------------------------If you can read this, thank a teacher.If you are reading it in English, thank a soldier.http://minidisc.org/minidisc_faq.html#_q99http://minidisc.org/minidisc_faq.html#_q61 Edited December 17, 2006 by Rob A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 shooter Posted December 22, 2006 Report Share Posted December 22, 2006 (edited) My 256kbps MP3 files converted to 64kbps ATRAC3plus sound fine to me on Sony NW-S706F, maybe my ears are not what they used to be Edited December 22, 2006 by shooter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 imhambone Posted December 22, 2006 Report Share Posted December 22, 2006 (edited) That maybe true with MP3 @ 120kbs, but what about 320VBR? I use 320 joint stereo to rip my music. Granted with the increased sound quality the files are larger. An average song can be anywhere from 8 - 10MB. Some songs I have are 20+MB. But that is why I have several large external hard drives! Edited December 22, 2006 by imhambone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 High Contrast Posted May 15, 2008 Report Share Posted May 15, 2008 if I have a CD that I would like to have on my Walkman,then I'll always rip it t atrac3+, but If I have some MP3's to put on my Walkman I won't convert them because I think that converting from one lossy format to another lossy format is nothing but evil to the soundquality. but all in all, I love atrac. allthough PCM rules (doh) and LAME is very good too greetzi do the same, ATRAC3plus for rip, but if you convert mp3 to ATRAC OR ANY OTHER FORMAT the quality goes down, and vice-versa like AAC to Mp3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Guest Stuge Posted May 16, 2008 Report Share Posted May 16, 2008 i do the same, ATRAC3plus for rip, but if you convert mp3 to ATRAC OR ANY OTHER FORMAT the quality goes down, and vice-versa like AAC to Mp3.well,I use to do that ,but now I have stopped doing that anymore .No more Atrac for me :/I rip my cds in Atrac if they are gapless Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 pata2001 Posted May 16, 2008 Report Share Posted May 16, 2008 Holly thread resurrection Batman! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 suso Posted May 20, 2008 Report Share Posted May 20, 2008 -why do you guys spend all that time and energy seeking for the optimal bitrate and stuff to rip your music?? do you really have that great stereo systems at home so you can REALLY enjoy and appreciate a 320 kbps mp3?? and i'm not talking just about a genezi sound system...I have my music just in the bitrate they come (if I download), and if I rip, I use 128 or 192 kbps, nothing more is necessary-as far as I have tried on my HD3, ATRAC @ 105 kbps files sound as good as a 112 kbps mp3 or so. and the ATRAC @ 66 kbps sounds like a 64 kbps mp3. Haven't tried the ATRAC3+ @64 kbps... shouldn't be better than the ATRAC @105 , isn't it? anyway, for me it's ok, I use the player 90% of the time while walking on the street, on the bus or on the subway, so I don't need any superb quality and I don't waste my time con testing the different bitrates and bla bla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 imagine_ Posted May 20, 2008 Report Share Posted May 20, 2008 -why do you guys spend all that time and energy seeking for the optimal bitrate and stuff to rip your music?? do you really have that great stereo systems at home so you can REALLY enjoy and appreciate a 320 kbps mp3?? and i'm not talking just about a genezi sound system...I have my music just in the bitrate they come (if I download), and if I rip, I use 128 or 192 kbps, nothing more is necessary-as far as I have tried on my HD3, ATRAC @ 105 kbps files sound as good as a 112 kbps mp3 or so. and the ATRAC @ 66 kbps sounds like a 64 kbps mp3. Haven't tried the ATRAC3+ @64 kbps... shouldn't be better than the ATRAC @105 , isn't it? anyway, for me it's ok, I use the player 90% of the time while walking on the street, on the bus or on the subway, so I don't need any superb quality and I don't waste my time con testing the different bitrates and bla blaI think if you have expensive canalphones, it is worth it to spend the time to choose the best format. However, if you download your music in mp3, it makes no sense at all to even think about this issue, as any conversion will lose quality. The only thing that will differ is ripping CDs, at which point you will want to find the best balance between sound quality and number of songs you can fit on your player at once. If you want to give up freedom, atrac3/atrac3plus is the best format in terms of balance, but if you want to use your files on other devices which don't support atrac3, then mp3 is most likely the best bet. Any other discussion of this issue is only based on personal preference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 The Mule Posted May 21, 2008 Report Share Posted May 21, 2008 I used to convert all my downloaded mp3's to atrac but its not worth it. I just stick to mp3 from now on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question
7seas
I used to rip my CD's at cbr 320kbps.
I've read about ripping to the atrac3 format will reduce my filesize by 50%.
Is there somebody who can tell me at wich bitrate i have to rip in atrac3 to have te same quality as my mp3 file at 320kbps cbr?
thx
7seas
Link to comment
Share on other sites
19 answers to this question
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.