[Starsky5000]

Hi...i want the Sony NWZ-A818 badly but before i do make a purchase i wanna know if it supports FLAC or any form of lossless codec?

I take my music seriously & want the best quality audio possible so i always try to get an mp3 player that supports FLAC (my preferred choice of lossless codec).

Also whats the difference between the Sony NWZ-A818 & the Sony NWZS616 mp3 Player?

Thank You.

 

[jarrett]

I think the only differences are: navigation, screen size (2" versus 1.8"), and the 618 has an FM tuner. The 610 models only differ by capacity (2gb, 4gb, 8gb)

The only lossless files you can playback are WAV o_O

 

[grommal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Starsky5000 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hi...i want the Sony NWZ-A818 badly but before i do make a purchase i wanna know if it supports FLAC or any form of lossless codec? Also whats the diffence between the Sony NWZ-A818 & the Sony NWZS616 mp3 Player? Thank You.

There's a whole thread here on the differences between the S6xx and A8xx series, as well as threads with reviews of each. Lots of info, if you just search around a bit.

 

[Audio-Fi]

Seriously, FLAC is nothing but just an excuse to fill up your memory. There is no difference between FLAC, ATRAC 352kbps, or MP3 320kbps. There so little difference between all of those. It's nearly impossible to spot one dither. I would say rip your CD to ATRAC3plus @ 352kbps and it will sound 99.99999% identical with no sonic difference. It will save you space and battery. As a personal preference, this is the best audio compression. If you want to feel all warm and fuzzy just to convince yourself ATRAC, AAC, and MP3 sounds inferior then use WAV. It's PCM and it does nothing to the raw audio. It's still 44.1kHz, 16 bit, and 1441kbps.

 

[zip22]

so what is it? no difference or little difference?

Flac is more than an excuse to fill up memory, it is a great way to archive cds with tags and less space than WAV.

 

[Audio-Fi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zip22 /img/forum/go_quote.gif so what is it? no difference or little difference? Flac is more than an excuse to fill up memory, it is a great way to archive cds with tags and less space than WAV.

The Sony NWZ-A818 and NWZ-A618 only has a max of 8GB and it's not built for archiving CDs. NWZ-A818 or NWZ-618 does not support FLAC so you have WAV for lossless. ATRAC, MP3, AAC, and WMA contains ID3 tags and also a great way to archive CDs. The difference is little to none especially when playing on those DAP. If you have headphones something like Grado RS-2 or Sony MDR-R10 hooked up to a tube amp or equivalent then I guess it would make a tad difference. If you have something like 96kHz/24 bit at the same bit rate, yes it will make a difference. But you are stuck with 44.1kHz/16 bit no matter what source you use, there is little to no difference.

 

[FenderP]

The NWZ Series does not support ATRAC. If it did, it would most likely support ATRAC Advanced Lossless, which is like FLAC.

The NW series in Japan supports ATRAC still.

And there is a difference SQ-wise with lossless vs. lossy, but not everyone can detect it. If you're archiving, lossless is the way to go.

 

[Sparky191]

Which portable supports ATRAC Lossless. I didn't think any of them did.

 

[DKaz]

Sony NW-80X series supports ATRAC. It also uses SonicStage though, but I have heard that the software has made considerable leaps.

 

[Sparky191]

None of them support ATRAC Lossless.

Unless you love SoincStage, and Atrac I'd avoid it.

 

[Mik]

I went with the A818 mainly because of the build quality. It's reminiscent of Sony's older Minidisc players in styling, which I like. The S61x models just look and feel cheaper. Even though both may sound the same, it's worth the marginal price difference to have a player that looks good too.