do you play lossless or lossy on your dap?

Oct 20, 2004 at 8:36 PM Post #2 of 85
lossy, 224 aac on 4g ipod
 
Oct 20, 2004 at 8:42 PM Post #3 of 85
Until I can get a 60 GB DAP that plays lossless (new iPod maybe), I'm sticking with lossy. Even then, I'm not sure about the benefits given that my headphones aren't exactly revealing or hi-fi. In the future when battery life is really long and when hard drives are really big, I'll go lossless. But for now, I chose the Carbon over the Karma. When I get my lossless player, I'll get one with a large HD.
 
Oct 20, 2004 at 8:49 PM Post #4 of 85
Lossy, 320 kbps AAC...
 
Oct 20, 2004 at 9:14 PM Post #5 of 85
256k AAC all the way for me
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Oct 20, 2004 at 9:43 PM Post #6 of 85
lossy, mp3 --alt-preset standard
 
Oct 20, 2004 at 9:47 PM Post #7 of 85
224k AAC on my 40 Gig Pod. I'd have gone lossless in a heartbeat, but I wouldn't have come close to storing even 30 percent of the music collection...
 
Oct 20, 2004 at 10:51 PM Post #8 of 85
I personally use both lossy and loseless files on my 20 gig iPod. Most of my music is in lossy but for alblums that are tried and true i have them recorded in lossless. Most of the ones I have in lossless currently are alblums that I am familiar with inside and out and have listen to tons of times over the years on many different audio systems. Basically my reference material is in lossless. Eventually I will re-encode all of my CD's to lossless when I get larger drives for my computer and a larger iPod.
 
Oct 21, 2004 at 12:09 AM Post #10 of 85
Quote:

Originally Posted by Duncan
256k AAC all the way for me
smily_headphones1.gif



224 aac for me. 2nd gen 10gb ipod with koss portapros. wanted to ask; do you notice a significant difference between 224 and 256?
 
Oct 21, 2004 at 12:54 AM Post #11 of 85
Lossless.
smily_headphones1.gif


I've got 20 gigs, and half of it is free even with all the FLACs I send to it.

I don't think the differences in Ogg Vorbis files and FLAC files are apparent through quick listening, but if you hear the same song on a regular basis in a lossy format and a lossless format, it sounds more compressed and less full to me. More of a long term thing.. I tested this theory some time ago.
smily_headphones1.gif


If I were to use a lossy codec, it'd probably be Ogg Vorbis GT3b2 -q8. Much smaller than FLAC, very high bitrate for lossy.

I also use FLAC if I have MPC files I want on my karma. Instead of transcoding them to Ogg Vorbis or MP3 and having them sound worse, or just not using them at all, I can transcode them to FLAC with no quality loss and send them to my Karma.

I love Rio.
biggrin.gif
biggrin.gif
 
Oct 21, 2004 at 4:49 AM Post #12 of 85
Quote:

Originally Posted by uzziah
224 aac for me. 2nd gen 10gb ipod with koss portapros. wanted to ask; do you notice a significant difference between 224 and 256?


I did, yes...

I ripped a NightWish CD at 224, and - at the time it sounded okay, pretty good really, but then I ripped a different one at 256, and it just seemed more alive, slightly less processed. Maybe not quite as extreme, but a good analogy would be to have something shrink wrapped... you can still see it clearly enough, yet it doesn't look quite real..

The difference I heard is not going to be a problem in the real world, barely noticeable... but, if you've got the extra HD space, then why not?
wink.gif


I didn't like 320k either, but thats another story
 
Oct 21, 2004 at 5:14 AM Post #13 of 85
I'd love to use uncompressed files, but the hit on battery life and storage space is too significant. I only get 5-6 hours from my Zen with wav files, instead of at least 10+ with mp3, and I had already filled a third of the drive space with only 17 albums.
 
Oct 21, 2004 at 6:14 AM Post #14 of 85
Lossy, MP3s encoded at >160 or VBR. Don't have the equipment to hear much of a difference between lossy and lossless, so it's not worth the hit in storage and battery life.
 
Oct 21, 2004 at 6:30 AM Post #15 of 85
all EAC/LAME - APS/APX/API

mostly i rip at APX which is like 256kbit VBR


i think lossless on a DAP is severe overkill. i mean the places where a portable audio player is most useful (outside the house), and with portable-type headphones, it's unlikely that listener would be able to discern the nuances that seperate high-bitrate tracks from uncompressed ones. maybe with Ety's, but still, I don't think it's worth the reduced number of tracks it will hold and the reduced battery life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top