Jump to content
  • 0

Mp3 vs. ATRAC3

Rate this question


7seas

Question

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

  • 0

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

<It is actually proven that ATRAC3plus 64kbps sounds BETTER than MP3 128kbps

Where 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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Definitely convert to ATRAC3plus. It is actually proven that ATRAC3plus 64kbps sounds BETTER than MP3 128kbps just slightly.

Says who, Sony? :D 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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

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) :P

and LAME is very good too :)

greetz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

<It is actually proven that ATRAC3plus 64kbps sounds BETTER than MP3 128kbps

Where 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.

atrac3plus_vs_mp3.gif

http://minidisc.org/minidisc_faq.html#_q99

atrac3plus_rating.gif

http://minidisc.org/minidisc_faq.html#_q61

Edited by Rob A
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

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 by imhambone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

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) :P

and LAME is very good too :)

greetz

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Guest Stuge

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

-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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

-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

I 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.

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
Answer this question...

×   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...