topic Re: Mp3 192kbps versus Atrac3plus 256kbps in PCs & Accessories

Mp3 192kbps versus Atrac3plus 256kbps

Snalko — Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:14:44 GMT

Hi, I just have the pocket for a week now and I am still not sure what the best sounding solution is.

All my Mp3 in 192kbps transferred to Atrac3plus 256kbps sound really good but it takes quit some space and time to convert.

And I am not really happy with sonic stage, it is not as easy as Itunes, the nice feature though is that you have the cover off the album on your display.

Re: Mp3 192kbps versus Atrac3plus 256kbps

clubuser — Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:33:25 GMT

Hi he(a)r(e) my voice:
Sound quality:
an independent study gave the result that the sound quality of atrac is slightly better than MP3 at the same compression rate.
But you should know that even a 310kbps atrac cannot be better than its source. Meaning that if you create this from a 48kbps version it will still be sounding shitty.

I agree to the sonic stage problem - but be advised that the Sony engineers do NOT conider The current version of Sonic Stage as being final. Meaning that there will be future versions available.

Whay don't you list your Sonic Stage criticism and i will try to forward them?!

CUCU

Re: Mp3 192kbps versus Atrac3plus 256kbps

jammold — Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:54:02 GMT

Whay don't you list your Sonic Stage criticism and i will try to forward them?!

LOL OK CU... You asked for it!

1) Databases - many users have complained of the loss of their music due to corrupt databases or the fact that SonicStage does not even start with a damaged database. Backups are not easy either - why do we have to connect to the Internet?

2) MagicGate only MemorySticks are restrictive, SonicStage does include DRM but I don't want to use DRM media because it will be more expensive - I found out the hard way when SonicStage refused to even acknowledge the MemoryStick which works fine in Windows XPSP2 with the updated drivers from VAIO-Link... Not good

3) It would be nice if we could convert OpenMG into MP3 format for private backups to be made but the user is forced to make MP3 backups as well as ATRAC3/ATRAC3plus backups - I for instance want the flexibility of MP3's in the ATRAC format...

This will do for starters!:smileylaugh:

Regards,
James.

Re: Mp3 192kbps versus Atrac3plus 256kbps

kee-lo_ — Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:13:56 GMT

Less DRM would be nice.
Look at apple.

Re: Mp3 192kbps versus Atrac3plus 256kbps

Vas — Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:11:48 GMT

Well said JamesMold
Especially for the point 1
And I have got a MiniDisc Player/Recorder (MDS-PC3) which is not useful with sonic Stage 1 (for drag and drop function). I even asked an expert in the ¿JunXion¿ (sony road show 2003 in Surrey). He told me to bring myMD Deck an he had go with that for 40min but unsuccessful. He referred me to the Vaio Support, which gave me another number, which again gave me another number and their line was busy all the time, very strange and I gave up (after my experience with Vaio Support).

The guy, from roads show, has still got my M-Crew software. (forgot to take it out from their Desktop.)
-------------------------------------------

Vas

Re: Mp3 192kbps versus Atrac3plus 256kbps

Snalko — Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:30:56 GMT

My experience with the bitrate is that I find Atrac3plus64 the best sounding, in combination with a Sennheiser MX500 earplug/headphone.
I transfer my own cd,s and mp3,s 192kbps in Atrac3plus64, before I used the higher 256 variant but after many listenings I can't hear the difference on headphones. :smileygrin: