| Author |
Message |
andy
Guest
|
 Posted:
Wed Nov 02, 2005 2:55 pm Post subject:
Re: Which Encoding Option Better for Listening |
|
|
| Quote: | encoded my entire collection in wma at 64kb.
Can't tell the difference really. If I didn't know any
better i would think that i was listening to my regular
mp3s at 128 kb
|
What equipment are you using to listen with?
And the future of consumer audio is...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
asdf
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:42 am Post subject:
Re: Which Encoding Option Better for Listening |
|
|
creative muvo txfm. I'm not an audiophile so maybe that's why it all
sound the same to me.
"andy" <andy19191@fsmail.net> wrote in message
news:1130921722.359131.258920@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | encoded my entire collection in wma at 64kb.
Can't tell the difference really. If I didn't know any
better i would think that i was listening to my regular
mp3s at 128 kb
What equipment are you using to listen with?
And the future of consumer audio is...
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Codifus
Guest
|
| Posted:
Thu Nov 03, 2005 7:56 pm Post subject:
Re: Which Encoding Option Better for Listening |
|
|
asdf wrote:
| Quote: | creative muvo txfm. I'm not an audiophile so maybe that's why it all
sound the same to me.
"andy" <andy19191@fsmail.net> wrote in message
news:1130921722.359131.258920@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
encoded my entire collection in wma at 64kb.
Can't tell the difference really. If I didn't know any
better i would think that i was listening to my regular
mp3s at 128 kb
What equipment are you using to listen with?
And the future of consumer audio is...
Just like in Home hifi, the speakers make the greatest impact on the |
sound quality of a system. In this case the speakers are the headphones.
Simply replacing the ones that came with your Muvo with the Koss
PortaPro or Sennhiesser PX100s will improve the sound of your player
significantly. There are obviously other headphones you can also try,
but the ones I suggested are cheap enough and have a great reputation
for sound quality.
I have the Koss Portapros and absolutely love them.
CD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asdf
Guest
|
| Posted:
Fri Nov 04, 2005 5:43 am Post subject:
Re: Which Encoding Option Better for Listening |
|
|
the ones that i have are sony phontopia (?) earbuds.
I highly recommend them after trying almost every other
small headphones. these are the most comfortable.
"Codifus" <codifus@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:sGoaf.8078$ex4.5521@fe08.lga...
| Quote: | asdf wrote:
creative muvo txfm. I'm not an audiophile so maybe that's why it all
sound the same to me.
"andy" <andy19191@fsmail.net> wrote in message
news:1130921722.359131.258920@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
encoded my entire collection in wma at 64kb.
Can't tell the difference really. If I didn't know any
better i would think that i was listening to my regular
mp3s at 128 kb
What equipment are you using to listen with?
And the future of consumer audio is...
Just like in Home hifi, the speakers make the greatest impact on the
sound quality of a system. In this case the speakers are the headphones.
Simply replacing the ones that came with your Muvo with the Koss
PortaPro or Sennhiesser PX100s will improve the sound of your player
significantly. There are obviously other headphones you can also try,
but the ones I suggested are cheap enough and have a great reputation
for sound quality.
I have the Koss Portapros and absolutely love them.
CD |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Larsen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 05, 2005 4:05 pm Post subject:
Re: Which Encoding Option Better for Listening |
|
|
asdf wrote:
| Quote: | I got Muvo flash player and encoding program that
comes with it has 3 encoding options: wave, mp3,
wma, wma pro and wma lossless. Almost all of my
files are in mp3(128kb) and i'm wondering if i can resample
them to a different format or bitrate and save some space on my device.
My question is: which of the formats above should i choose to save as much
space as possible while still maintaining decent sound quality.
|
192 kbit mp3 minimum is my preference for bit rate reduction, WMA
lossless is likely to be too bulky, but is of course lossless. 128 kbit
mp32 sounds plain boring to me. Downsampling to 32 kHz allows the
encoder more bitrate for use in the midrange and may reduce "spittyness"
but downsampling also comes at a cost in quality. I am not suggesting
that you convert existing mp3 files, the qualiy loss because of the
conversion is likely to be unacceptable.
| Quote: | thank you very much
|
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
******************************************* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Larsen
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 05, 2005 4:07 pm Post subject:
Re: Which Encoding Option Better for Listening |
|
|
Mike Rivers wrote:
| Quote: | You can try the encoding options when using it to record new material.
I suspect that the lossless WMA might be best, but it depends on the
characteristics of the music you're encoding. Some algorithms work
better on some music and not so well on others.
|
Lossless sure is lossless? - where and how would the encoder
caracteristics influence it?
Kind regards
Peter Larsen
--
*******************************************
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
******************************************* |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pooh Bear
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 06, 2005 5:42 am Post subject:
Re: Which Encoding Option Better for Listening |
|
|
asdf wrote:
| Quote: | I got Muvo flash player and encoding program that
comes with it has 3 encoding options: wave, mp3,
wma, wma pro and wma lossless. Almost all of my
files are in mp3(128kb) and i'm wondering if i can resample
them to a different format or bitrate and save some space on my device.
My question is: which of the formats above should i choose to save as much
space as possible while still maintaining decent sound quality.
|
Why bother ?
Use a 'magic' cable to listen to them instead.
Anything that's as bad as 128k mp3 is hardly 'decent' sound quality anyway
IMHO. Once it's been trashed once any further recoding will simply trash it
some more.
Graham |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 06, 2005 5:42 am Post subject:
Re: Which Encoding Option Better for Listening |
|
|
You won't get any more fidelity than you started with and you might get
some unpleasant artifacts but try it see what happens
Thomas
www.yourhomestudio.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sun Nov 06, 2005 5:42 am Post subject:
Re: Which Encoding Option Better for Listening |
|
|
Well, wave is definately out of the question - it will chew up about
11MB per minute of music. Depending on which wma encoding you use, it
can use from about 1MB per minute(comparable to mp3) up to over 2MB per
minute. My money is on .wma. It seems to keep the frequency spectrum
intact whereas mp3 seems to lose some bass in encoding.
Hope this helps,
Thomas
www.yourhomestudio.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in