[zip22]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lifesaburrito Is it true that wma has better sound than mp3, meaning if I had two tracks with the same kbps, one wma, and one mp3, the wma would sound better? I don't remember where I heard that. If I can get away with having mp3 160 sound quality from a smaller bitrate wma, that would be nice. Otherwise I'll just go for the mp3 160.

the newest WMA may be a little better (but most likely, not noticeable). heres a public listening test at 128kbps
http://www.maresweb.de/listening-tes...-1/results.htm

i would still go with mp3, it doesn't limit you at all.

 

[LaBreaHead]

WMA is advantageous vs. MP3's mainly at 64kbps (a rate that might have made sense in a 128MB flash player two or three years ago).

MP3's are usable on a wider variety of player brands (iPod and Sony, for example, in addition to all the other usual suspects). If that's an issue ...

WMAs supposdly consume a bit more battery power.

You're getting a player with a fairly hefty capacity -- I use 192 kbps, which is not bad, and versatile in flash players all the way up to my Rio Karma, but if I were to re-rip, I'd go for something better. For a 30GB (and above) player, I'd consider a more substantial size, if only because you can (and you'll be re-ripping this time around, anyway, right?).

Edit: OK, so 30GB is too small for you? Good problem to have! I'd say just go with 192 as a workable minimum, with an eye to the future ... some day you'll have a player with more than 30GB capacity, and do you want to have to re-rip again if you rip "too small" this time around? (Or is the quantity of songs on your player at any one time of prime importance?) Consider just stockpiling songs at whatever rate you use, and rotating them in and out of the player. Capacities are going up in hard drive players. Just a thought ...

 

[Febs]

If you're looking to conserve space or maxmize the number of files that you can have on your player while still keeping a decent file size, use the most recent version of LAME (3.97b2) and encode at the -V5 setting, which will produce variable bitrate files that average about 130kbps. You could also try -V6 setting which will produce slightly smaller files at a slightly lower bitrate. Both of these settings will produce files that are a great balance of small file size and good sound quality for portable use.

 

[mister__big]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtheisticFreedom Yes, but how can you listen to 64 in the first place? Again, no offense, but I am honestly astounded that people actually listen to music at that bitrate.

Am I the only one who finds it amusingly ironic that your username is "AtheisticFreedom" but you can't grasp how someone can have a different perception of things than you?

Anyways, I do agree that 64kbps sounds like noise, not music. OP, you should really try ripping some of your music in different bitrates (start from LAME 192kbps VBR and work upwards) and see what works best for you.

 

[zip22]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaBreaHead WMAs supposdly consume a bit more battery power.

good point! i almost forgot. the vision:m's battery life for WMAs is MUCH worse than its battery life for mp3s. the specs on creative's website say 14 hours for normal use and 8 hours for WMA 64kbps.

 

[ptaaty]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zip22 good point! i almost forgot. the vision:m's battery life for WMAs is MUCH worse than its battery life for mp3s. the specs on creative's website say 14 hours for normal use and 8 hours for WMA 64kbps.

We think this has to do with DRM. Non-drm WMA I do not believe has the same issue. The WMA spec on Creatives site assumes DRM which kills the battery life. Some people one dapreview have used non-drm WMA and it seems at least in the same ballpark as mp3.

Another case of DRM ****ing over the consumer.

Also for the original poster I cannot believe anyone can use Ety's or Grados with 64kbps tracks!! Maybe they have the top end completely axed but it would imagine it is like a cheese grater on my ear drums.

 

[MCC]

Try ripping 1 CD @ 320k. You'll quickly hear what you're missing w/ 64kb. IMO, there isn't really even a point in using high end headphones with such low bitrate audio. Listening to even 128k audio w/ my HD-280s almost gives me a headache.

 

[The_Duke_Of_Eli]

64 kbps? How do you live? Now that you have the hdd space, re-rip everything into lossless or 320kbps.

 

[GreatDane]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Duke_Of_Eli 64 kbps? How do you live? Now that you have the hdd space, re-rip everything into lossless or 320kbps.

...but you can fit 30,000 songs in that way lol

I rip @320 w/ my ZVM which sounds great.

 

[senny-ftw]

I find even 320kbps is significantly worse than lossless. iTunes with Apple Lossless couldn't be easier. It has high space requirements, but I find that with my iPod mini I'd prefer to have my favourite songs sounding good, than all my songs on there, sounding bad.

If 320kbps is the best you can get out of ZVM then that'll do

 

[GreatDane]

Quote:

Originally Posted by senny-ftw I find even 320kbps is significantly worse than lossless. iTunes with Apple Lossless couldn't be easier. It has high space requirements, but I find that with my iPod mini I'd prefer to have my favourite songs sounding good, than all my songs on there, sounding bad. If 320kbps is the best you can get out of ZVM then that'll do

Supported Audio formats: MP3, WMA (inc MS PD DRM), WAV

 

[Omari149]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaBreaHead WMA is advantageous vs. MP3's mainly at 64kbps (a rate that might have made sense in a 128MB flash player two or three years ago). MP3's are usable on a wider variety of player brands (iPod and Sony, for example, in addition to all the other usual suspects). If that's an issue ... WMAs supposdly consume a bit more battery power. You're getting a player with a fairly hefty capacity -- I use 192 kbps, which is not bad, and versatile in flash players all the way up to my Rio Karma, but if I were to re-rip, I'd go for something better. For a 30GB (and above) player, I'd consider a more substantial size, if only because you can (and you'll be re-ripping this time around, anyway, right?). Edit: OK, so 30GB is too small for you? Good problem to have! I'd say just go with 192 as a workable minimum, with an eye to the future ... some day you'll have a player with more than 30GB capacity, and do you want to have to re-rip again if you rip "too small" this time around? (Or is the quantity of songs on your player at any one time of prime importance?) Consider just stockpiling songs at whatever rate you use, and rotating them in and out of the player. Capacities are going up in hard drive players. Just a thought ...

I read on Best Buy and Circuit City that the 30GB Zen vision can hold 15,000 songs compared to a 40gb Ipod that can hold 10,000.

I' m thinking about getting the Zen Vision because my 4g 40gb Ipod is broke, and from what I read it's a better deal than a 60gb video Ipod which doesn't have that many featues. Is this true?

 

[ojnihs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omari149 I read on Best Buy and Circuit City that the 30GB Zen vision can hold 15,000 songs compared to a 40gb Ipod that can hold 10,000. I' m thinking about getting the Zen Vision because my 4g 40gb Ipod is broke, and from what I read it's a better deal than a 60gb video Ipod which doesn't have that many featues. Is this true?

First off, I'd really start another thread, cause I feel that this is a bit of thread jacking.

Second, I don't know where you read that 30GB's on a Zen Vision is better than 40GB's on a iPod. Whoever wrote that must have been on crack. The iPod 40gb 10,000 song limit is only if you rip at 128 AAC (or MP3 for that matter) and the average length of your complete collection of music is 4 minutes. I'd believe this figure only if the music on the Zen was at like 64 kbps and the music on the iPod was at 128 kbps.

Honestly though, if they'd used some common sense, they would think "why would a 30GB Zen Vision be able to hold 5,000 more songs than a 40GB iPod?" It's not like there's some magical thing that Creative did to make their gigabyte bigger than Apple's gigabyte. Best Buy and Circuit City need to shape up a bit.

 

[Ploop]

160kbps Mp3 vbr with lame is pretty nice..much better then other stuff.

 

[PodMan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omari149 I read on Best Buy and Circuit City that the 30GB Zen vision can hold 15,000 songs compared to a 40gb Ipod that can hold 10,000. I' m thinking about getting the Zen Vision because my 4g 40gb Ipod is broke, and from what I read it's a better deal than a 60gb video Ipod which doesn't have that many featues. Is this true?

30GB - 15,000 songs @ 64kbps WMA
40GB - 10,000 songs @ 128kbps AAC