Best file format for NW-A3000

[theo607]

I mainly rip from music CDs and don't have a huge collection so capacity is not an issue. I just want the best Audio quality I can get. Which is the best format. I have read various articles on Atrac Vs MP3, some say MP3 others say Atrac.

I tried a test with the same track ripped into 4 different formats and transferred to my device. They were

Atrac 352 kbps

MP3 352 kbps

Atrac 352 kbps Lossless

Atrac3 132 kbps

To my ears I can tell very little between Atrac 352 and MP3 352. I would say that Lossless sounds marginaly better over all and Atrac3 132 was the poorest in terms of quality but the differences are very small.

This is the best way I know toi try and decide. Any comments or ideas would be appreciated. I guess I don't fuly understand the differences between the diferent formats other than the compression rates

Thanks

[Ascariss]

I think you mean mp3 320? I don't think there is mp3 352 in connect player, correct me if I am wrong.

I use anywhere from mp3 192 to mp3 320 and the inbetween, mp3 256 and mp3 vbr. Majority of my songs are now 320 mp3 and I can't really say anything bad about the quality, it's quite good.

I don't like atrac for 2 reasons. takes time to re encode, which is bad, since going from lossy format to another lossy format is just stupid, and second, I don't want a second duplicate collection of my mp3s on the harddrive, waste of space. I don't want to delete my mp3s, Some delete the mp3s or source songs that are encoded into atrac, but I paid for a lot of my mp3s, and I like to have them on my harddrive.

So honestly, I would recommend mp3 as the better choice, since no need to re encode to atrac which saves time when transferring over files.

But if you need better battery life and gapless playback for for the higher atrac codec, or lower one for longer battery life. It all depends what you want and need.

[lecram1971]

First of all, as I always say, the sound depends on the ears of the one who use the device.

I recomend, if space is not a limitation to do this:

If you have to rip a CD use Atrac 352 or 256, for me sounds almoste the same and very close to CD quality. Atrac is gapless so if you want to rip a CD (Pink Floyd for example) the best is to have ir gapless.

If you have MP3 and your device can use it don´t re-rip again in Atrac, the probably will lost quality.

One question, the Atrac Lossles you play it in your unit or in Sonic Stage??, because the lossless function only works in Sonic Stage.

The idea for this is to have in Lossles in our PC and tranfer in the rate (for example 352) to the device, but you always use a loss format in the unit, until now. No Sony device plays Atrac Lossless format.

If I am wrong with this please tell me.

In my experience (with MD) I use Atrac 132 (for my ears sounds like MP3 192) and is fine for me, but because of the space the HI-MD unit has.

Hope this helps.

[theo607]

Thanks for both replies. I agree for exisiting MP3s that they stay as is. For ripping I will stick with Atrac.

You are right about the lossless. I hadn't appreciated that.

Are there any benefits in changing the ripping speed in sonicstage to improve sound quality and how does this work, i.e it doesn't change the file size so how is the uality improved through the ripping process

Thanks again

[simon.giesen]

Yes, ATRAC Lossless is intended to be used on your PC or Network Reciever only.

For example:

ATRAC3Plus Lossless 352Kbit consists of the LOSSLESS PART AND THE ATRAC3Plus 352Kbit PART.

WHEN TRANSFERRING TO AN ATRAC3Plus DEVICE, SUCH AS THE PLAYSTATION PORTABLE OR THE NW SERIES, SONIC STAGE IS TRANSFERRING ONLY THE ATRAC3PLUS 352Kbit PART !!!

[pata2001]

I would only use Atrac for gapless, nothing else. Stick with MP3 Lame --preset fast standard, and you won't have to worry about compatibility with other/future devices.