movingshadow Posted January 24, 2007 Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 hello forum users!i just have one quick question regarding the compression options in sonic stage 4.2:when i go to the filetype/bitrate settings menu i see the following options: atrac, atrac advanced lossless, wav, mp3,...if i choose the very first one (atrac) and then open the bitrate box i see the available bitrates and next to 132kb/s it says "atrac3".i've heard about the atrac3plus method (in combination with the 64kb/s) and would prefer that over the atrac3, but unfortunately i don't have an entry next to any bitrate (also not next to 64kb/s) where it would say "atrac3plus".do i have to install a seperate codec to be able to choose the atrac3plus?or why else would it say "atrac3" only next to the 132kb/s entry and nowhere else? what happens with all the others bitrate settings, will the songs be atrac3, or atrac3plus, or what?or is the whole thing just not explained properly and actually every bitrate setting (in the atrac entry) is atrac3plus anyway? which would bring me back to the question why it says "atrac3" next to the 132kb/s in the first place?!?please help!thanx a lot,shadow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
navsimpson Posted January 24, 2007 Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 (edited) Hiya,Any bitrate under 'ATRAC' that is not explicitly listed as ATRAC3 would be ATRAC3plus. So essentially, any bitrate you select other than ATRAC 132kbs will be ATRAC3plus. As a bit of an aside, lots of people say that 64kbs is acceptable for music, but I think it sounds like the music is being played underwater. To each their own though - and apparently, for some types of music, it sounds much better than others.Hope this helps,-Nav Edited January 24, 2007 by navsimpson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
movingshadow Posted January 24, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 thanx for your reply nav!i'll have to do some listening/testing now to figure out which bitrate sounds ok to me.talking "lame mp3" i'm used to 192kb/s, but i don't know what the equivalent would be with the atrac3/atrac3plus. any idea?thx,shadow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
navsimpson Posted January 24, 2007 Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 Hey, no worries!If you're using LAME, then I'd probably just stick with that. The primary benefit of ATRAC now is that it gives you better battery life on Sony devices. A LAME VBR 0 file will probably sound better than most ATRAC files, except for possibly ATRAC3plus 352kbs. You might save yourself a lot of space if you just stick to LAME VBR.-Nav Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
movingshadow Posted January 24, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 believe me, i would stick to mp3 (and all my files on the harddrive are mp3), but i'm thinking of getting an mp3 player from sony (the NW-E002) and i think all mp3 files get converted into an atrac format when i transfer them to the player via sonicstage. i don't think they just get copied to the player in the mp3 format i have them in...but i figured out that there are other programs available (besides sonic stage) to get the mp3 files just like you have them on your harddrive onto the mp3 player. maybe those programs would be the best solution.i just thought that maybe this atrac format would be an improvement and i could fit more songs on the player in this format (at good quality) than with the lame mp3 format.greetz,shadow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
navsimpson Posted January 24, 2007 Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 Nope - all current (and most past) Sony players support MP3, so you can just stick with that.This from CNET's review of the NWE002:"Finally, I must point out that Sony is taking a step in the right direction by adding AAC and WMA support to its latest MP3 players, and that includes the NW-E000. Of course, it also plays MP3 and both protected and unprotected ATRAC files (WMA and AAC must be unprotected). This is a surprisingly open attitude from the company that once didn't even directly support MP3 playback."-Nav Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
movingshadow Posted January 24, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 wow, cool!saved the day dude!greetz,shadow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
movingshadow Posted January 24, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 so the only advantage you'd have by still transferring the music in atrac format is the longer duration of the mp3-player battery?how big is the difference (several hours?)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stuge Posted January 24, 2007 Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 @movingshadow:Technically ,Atrac 3 Plus is better than Atrac 3 .Thats why songs will sound better when listened in Atrac3 Plus 128kpbs ,then in Atrac3 132kpbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
navsimpson Posted January 24, 2007 Report Share Posted January 24, 2007 For me the battery life difference is almost a third - i.e. 7-ish hours versus 12 or 13. However, my unit is getting close to 2 years old, and I use quite high bitrates, so that might account for that. Perhaps someone with an NWE002 could tell us?-Nav Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.