ATRAC3plus 256 to ATRAC3plus 64: Do any good?

[Andrew Soebali]

Hai all,

just a newbie here from PCDP user. Floating around between threads about ATRAC format. I ripped some audio CDs in ATRAC3+ 256 kbps. Due to shrink the file size, i am thinking about transfer it to PCDP to 64 kbps.

Is there any noticable difference between A3+256 and A3+64?

Which is better, saving the audio to A3+256 as archive and then transfer it to PCDP as A3+64 OR just plain transfer it from audio to A3+64?

If later is better, then i think i will waste more harddisk space because i'll double all the titles in each different bitrates. Any suggestion?

Thanks

[pata2001]

Transcoding from lossy to lossy (in this case, from 256kbps to 64kbps) in general is not recommended. If you want to use A3+ 64kbps anyway, just rip directly to that bitrate.

Is there any noticable difference between A3+256 and A3+64?

I would say yes. However, in general use outdoors, it's probably not noticable.

Best way for archiving is to rip your CDs to uncompressed WAV. Therefore you have the original source and quality. DVD blanks are so cheap nowadays that you can simply backup you audioCD in uncompressed WAV without worrying about space.

I would try to rip 1 track first, and see if you really like 64kbps' sound quality. If not, but you still need small file size, I would suggest using Atrac3 132kbps (LP2) instead.

All of that in assumption that you need gapless. If not, all Sony AtracCD PCDPs support MP3, and if you don't need gapless, I would just rip to MP3 instead of Atrac. Lame MP3 -V 5 is pretty good.

[Andrew Soebali]

Thank you for the reply.

Transcoding from lossy to lossy (in this case, from 256kbps to 64kbps) in general is not recommended. If you want to use A3+ 64kbps anyway, just rip directly to that bitrate.

I would say yes. However, in general use outdoors, it's probably not noticable.

Best way for archiving is to rip your CDs to uncompressed WAV. Therefore you have the original source and quality. DVD blanks are so cheap nowadays that you can simply backup you audioCD in uncompressed WAV without worrying about space.

So, what you're saying is using atrac3+ 256 as archiving is useless unless i really want to use that bitrate for everyday listening?

I would try to rip 1 track first, and see if you really like 64kbps' sound quality. If not, but you still need small file size, I would suggest using Atrac3 132kbps (LP2) instead.

Is that Atarac3+132 or Atrac3 132? Is there any Atrac3+132 kbps? This whole bitrate-conversion-thing confuses me. And i dont have any switch in SS 3 to activate LP mode. I have a slightest idea what LP is (by reading other threads) but i do not really grasp the idea. I assumed now they both just the same (Atrac and LP)?

All of that in assumption that you need gapless. If not, all Sony AtracCD PCDPs support MP3, and if you don't need gapless, I would just rip to MP3 instead of Atrac. Lame MP3 -V 5 is pretty good.

I really need gapless thing. One of my CD - Enigma Voyageur - the track between The Piano and Following The Sun do not cut properly. Most of the time i listen to the first song until the first few-seconds-part of the second song. I need gapless because the end of the first song is actually the first part of the second - they cut it wrongly.

Being a fan of a new age song many of the artists like to harmonize gap between tracks. Once you jeopardize with its cut, the music will go overbalance.

About MP3 (i listened MP3 song with Lame preset extreme V0), with D-NE20 Atrac definitely sound better. I like the way Sony change the ambience with Atrac compression. It sound 'different' from the original song (at least from my experience with other music player) but somewhat 'better'. Maybe it just me, but to me atrac is just a bit worse than SRS WOW music playing. Dont know how to explain.

Edited August 25, 2006 by Andrew Soebali

[pata2001]

Atrac3 132 kbps (not atrac3+) is also known as LP2 used in MDs. In the bitrate selection, there will be an option for 132kbps, and this is automatically switch the encoder to Atrac3 in Sonicstage. It's probably the best balance between size, sound quality, and compatibility (if you have older Atrac devices).

I would rip your favorite track to different bitrates, listen to them, and decide which bitrate you like. Unfortunately your selections is a little bit limited for AtracCD, since Sony has not enabled the various new Atrac3+ bitrates in making AtracCD.

[Ishiyoshi]

Is that Atarac3+132 or Atrac3 132? Is there any Atrac3+132 kbps? This whole bitrate-conversion-thing confuses me. And i dont have any switch in SS 3 to activate LP mode. I have a slightest idea what LP is (by reading other threads) but i do not really grasp the idea. I assumed now they both just the same (Atrac and LP)?

As Pata states, it is indeed ATRAC3 132kbps; and ATRAC3plus does not have a 132kbps bit rate.

For further information regarding the ATRAC compression, please read:

* Sony’s ATRAC World

* ATRAC explained at Minidisc.org.

* Wikipedia’s definition of ATRAC.

[grenert]

One important thing to remember is that when you rip from a CD to ATRAC, the resulting files will be gapless. HOWEVER, if you have ATRAC files and convert from one bitrate to another (for example, from 256 to 133), the files WILL NOT BE GAPLESS. I just tried it out on an ATRAC CD. So, you should rip to whatever you plan to use for the CDs.

-J. P.

[JustAnUnCoolCat]

Well, it's pretty much all been covered in prev replies.

At the end of the day, it's your ears... if you feel that it's easier/quicker/lazy man solution to transcode your existing 256K down to a more compact size - let your ears decide, chances are you'll think 'omigod...ferk listening to that' and realise that you can only be making better use of time by reripping to the format/bit-rate combo you want from the original source.

ATRAC3 @ 132K is indeed a nice all-rounder balance between quality and compact file size results. And as outlined and hinted at in a prev reply, it's also (ATRAC3 codec in particular) a globally supported 'Net Walkman' device series ATRAC combination you can use with just about ANY Sony/Awia 'Net Walkman' device and also play back in WMP for times when SS isn't available via a plugin.

In fact, it would have been a more sane solution if Sony had chosen ATRAC3 132K as ther defacto Connect Store release compression combo - otherwise, as CS users know and most ATRAC users know, 105K (which was the downloads combo CS used last i saw) is a little too edgy and gives not a lot of overall compactness solution for some material.. and for arguments sake, 132K would have been a way better 'nominal' lossy combo.

For keeping archive copies to reuse, why not simply rip (if you intend to use ATRAC primarily as the common use codec type) to ATRAC Lossless..??

The ATRAC Lossless mode also allows you to select a 'quick transfer' option of about three lossy combos (i think it was 256k, 64K and 48K ATRAC3Plus.. but my memory is not overly reliable).

That, for an ATRAC user who wants to archive and take advantage of 64K ATRAC3Plus, would make much more sense. Simply set SS to Lossless encoding with say the 64K quick transfer option set - rip to this, and you will then be able to generate as part of transfer to player or burning to ATRAC CD , the lossless content in ATRAC3Plus 64k which i suspect is what you want.

Is certainly quicker than inter-code transcodings and lossy->lossy ATRAC transcoding. Quicker, in fact, than the next best lossless code supported in SS (aka WMA9 LSL).

Clearly, if you want to archive in a way that's universally usable in damn near any OS for sharing/reuse purposes - then the use of WAV and a damned good organisation stragegy for file names and storage arrangement, is sound advice from a prev replier.

WAV, if not directly supported by some OS's, can always be imported in almost any OS with 44Khz audio playback support by setting an uncompressed PCM supporting editor/converter to ignore the headers and simply manually tell the soft what the recorded parameters were when the WAV's were generated.. same as you would for importing a RAW encoding (PCM uncompressed with no header in essense) into a conversion util to generate new alternative output.

As for the prev comment about ATRAC->ATRAC transcodes generating non-seamless results on playback of the resulting transfer to ATRAC CD - never actually did the transcode bit in relation to making ATRAC CD's (always ripped, in pre ATRAC Lossless days) direct from WMA9LSL or from original source to the required ATRAC lossy combo.

Guess i'll have to add that test to the old ever growing cat test list.

CAT ADVICE 101 - Do what works for you, but just remember.. 2nd gen transcoded clones of a 1st gen lossy encoding is not a HQ quick-win direction to head in, just a quick way out of doing what really takes less time in practise (aka it's got no real advantage timewise over re-ripping).

CAT ADVICE 101 PT II - If a quick win lazy man solution is chosen and the result stinks, then if the sane and rational cat spirit within is at all caring for what it puts up with when it comes to playback, then you learn to discard quick-win lazy solutions unless they are your only available option.

By hey, after all my years in this game.. what would i know about it...?? ;o)

*ducks to avoiding incoming virtual nukes, dungballs and other flamer weapons of choice that are often aimeed at my poor male feline avatar*

[Raydeen]

I could only noticed significant change in quality if you try to compress an already compressed file. If you convert from the original source to the smallest format the changes are minimal or unoticiable. I did from my original CDs to Atracc3plus 48 kbps (the smallest atracc so far) and the sound was still great

[Guest Stuge]

I could only noticed significant change in quality if you try to compress an already compressed file. If you convert from the original source to the smallest format the changes are minimal or unoticiable. I did from my original CDs to Atracc3plus 48 kbps (the smallest atracc so far) and the sound was still great

First of all no need to make it so Big.We can still understand what you are trying to say .

Basically, It is your personal choice .Sound of Audio files in Atrac3 Plus 48kpbs is unbearable to my ears(Even When I have converted Audio cd ).