[ElectricImages]

Hey guys, I am new to the mp3 player world although I have had a small home studio set up for quite a while now so i am not new to audio in general... still it seems there are a lot of formats mentioned on this board that I haven't encountered before.

I recently purchased a 20G zen touch and am considering re-ripping my cd's onto my laptop before I transfer the music to the zen touch to get the best combination of quality / space. All of the music I have on my laptop is in .wma format although about half of it is at wma's lossless rate (~800kbps? I forget exactly what it comes out as in wma) and the rest I'm not sure... I think maybe 256?

What is generally considered the best compromise of quality and space for these files? I do have a somewhat discerning ear, I am a pretty critical listener and have a good amount of experience with nearfield monitors but not in ear monitors (I also purchased the sennheiser cx300's to go with my player).

I have noticed a lot of talk on here about eac and lame but I am not sure what these formats/programs are. Anyone care to let me in on it?

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElectricImages I have noticed a lot of talk on here about eac and lame but I am not sure what these formats/programs are. Anyone care to let me in on it?

Let me see.
* EAC is short for Exact Audio Copy, which is one of the best CD ripper applications for MS Windows out there. I have never used it, so I can not comment any further. But take a look at the website: http://www.exactaudiocopy.de

* LAME is an MP3 encoder/decoder.
Several listening test show that LAME produce the highest-quality MP3 files at a bitrate of 128 kbps.
http://lame.sourceforge.net
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LAME

 

[nelamvr6]

Generally considered? It might be hard to come up with a consensus.

But the good news is that it's pretty easy for you to do your own experiments and decide for yourself.

Personally, when file size is a consideration I use mp3's encoded VBR Highest quality. VBR stands for "Variable Bit Rate".

EAC is not a format, it is a program for ripping, in my opinion it is the best program.

Lame isn't a format either, it is a program for encoding.

If you find yourself in a position where size isn't a major consideration then you should use lossless formats. There are a few of those too, but most find that flac is the best for lossless.

 

[ElectricImages]

what program can rip in flac format? What is that an acronym for?

In general, is something like a 320 kbps wma file going to be very noticably degraded compared to lossless or is the loss small? I will run my own tests once I have my stuff here but I am curious as to others' experiences so I know what to expect. I am just thinking that since I will not have top of the line earphones or an amp or anything the lossless encoding might not be worth the space it takes up.

 

[Brent Hutto]

1] Start reading on the hydrogenaudio.org forums for more than you ever wanted to know about encoding and testing and who knows what all.

2] Figure on installing Foobar 2000 on your computer so you can do blind ABXY tests between lossless and various lossy compressed formats. This does require that you have a decent quality setup for listening to music on your computer (i.e. a sound card that doesn't resample and a way to cut the Windows mixer out of the loop such as ASIO).

3] No matter how big a hard disk you get on your portable music player, the battery will last much longer if you can store the music with a less than 200kpbs bit rate on average. Only store music on a portable in a lossless format if your ears, with your equipment, can detect a difference between lossless and a smaller format.

4] Keep an open mind. Do not be surprised if you are unable to tell the difference between, for example, a LAME encoded MP3 file at around 125-150kbps and a lossless file that is 6-8 times larger. Very few people can detect difference (in a blind test) between moderate bitrate lossy encoded (with the latest encoders such as LAME, AoTuV, Nero, etc.) and the original file. Don't base your equipment and compression setup on what someone says you "ought" to be able to hear.

[EDIT] To answer your final question, the only people who can reliably distinguish between a 320kbps WMA file (properly encoded) and the original CD-quality music are a) well-trained listeners, b) with very good equipment and a quiet listening environment, c) listening to material purposely selected to point out the flaws in lossy encoders. And even then it takes extremely careful listening and they can't necessarily detect it 100% of the time.

 

[warrior05]

eac will rip to anything as long as it has access to the encoder. there are several places to go to follow how to set up eac. hydrogenaudio i'm pretty sure has one. the one i used is here.

it sounds like you are being realistic in regards to using a lossy format (wma, mp3, etc.) due to what you'll be listening on. i used to be a wma only kind of guy after doing listening tests against mp3. however, before i went flac i turned to mp3 because of 2 main reasons: 1) using the lame encoder does make a difference and ripping to 190 constant bitrate sounded pretty darn good, and 2) being a former zen touch owner, i found that listening to constant bitrate mp3 files helped battery life per charge.

my suggestion is to get eac installed and rip a song you know very well to 190 constant bitrate mp3. listen to it through whatever you plan on listening with - not your high end stuff - and see if it sounds fine. if it does, look no further and start ripping. if you go, "eh," then try a higher bitrate or try variable.

if you stick with wma, i say just use windows media player. i had all my wma stuff at 320 since that was the highest the zen touch would play. i'm almost positive the zen touch won't play wma's lossless format. though it will play variable bitrates.

in terms of size, wma and mp3 are similar at the same bitrates. variable format is even smaller in regards to file sizes and gives you the best bang for the buck in regards to sq and size of files.

nutty stuff, ay?

 

[ElectricImages]

haha yes this is all very helpful. Foobar sounds interesting, the only issue I see with it is that if I am running it on my computer and out my interface into my amp and out my monitors I will be judging if I can tell the differences in quality in a completely different environment from my zen touch / iem's. I think it is quite reasonable that I might be able to hear a difference on my studio stuff but not on the mp3 player. Is there a way in foobar to output the sound through the mp3 player? I can't seem to find too much explanation on the foobar website.

I guess the best bet will be to try the eac mp3's and comepare these with similar wma's and see how it goes. I don't really think I need lossless since my set up isn't really high end.

hey warrior, what kind of battery life did you get at 190kbps mp3's with the touch? I know it is supposed to have a really long battery life. Also, do you mean 190 battery life was better vs 320 was better vs variable? I know higher bitrates bring down battery life but you're saying variable is worse on batteries than the 320 as well?

 

[ElectricImages]

oh and 1 more question. Does the zen touch only support 16 bit files or could it play a 24 bit 44.1k .wav file? Anyone know?

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElectricImages what program can rip in flac format? What is that an acronym for?

Any CD ripper application that has built in FLAC support, or can call an external binary (ex. the FLAC binary).
FLAC is an acronym for Free Lossless Audio Codec.

I am trying to be helpful. But I wonder if you have ever heard of Google?

 

[ElectricImages]

haha yes of course. I have looked up a bunch of stuff about this and I could have looked that up too now that I think about it but I just thought I would ask here since I might get some valuable input that browsing through a bunch of random websites might not get me. This board is to discuss and get information about these kinds of things right? So I don't see what the big deal is. I appreciate the help everyone has given me.

 

[warrior05]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElectricImages haha yes this is all very helpful. Foobar sounds interesting, the only issue I see with it is that if I am running it on my computer and out my interface into my amp and out my monitors I will be judging if I can tell the differences in quality in a completely different environment from my zen touch / iem's. I think it is quite reasonable that I might be able to hear a difference on my studio stuff but not on the mp3 player. Is there a way in foobar to output the sound through the mp3 player? I can't seem to find too much explanation on the foobar website. I guess the best bet will be to try the eac mp3's and comepare these with similar wma's and see how it goes. I don't really think I need lossless since my set up isn't really high end. hey warrior, what kind of battery life did you get at 190kbps mp3's with the touch? I know it is supposed to have a really long battery life. Also, do you mean 190 battery life was better vs 320 was better vs variable? I know higher bitrates bring down battery life but you're saying variable is worse on batteries than the 320 as well?

you kind of lost me with with foobar since i hadn't mentioned it but i think i know what you're getting at. you won't be able to play something on your computer and have it come through your zen touch. you'll have to transfer the songs onto your unit. that'll be the best way to do your sound tests. rip a couple of songs in several formats (i've done this and include the format in the song title) then load them onto your player in one shot.

i can't give you any real world battery life numbers because when i was switching over to mp3 i then went the RWA iMod route and no longer use it. i did, however, take it with me on a recent trip to california and i noticed an improvement. from searching other forums, it is my understanding that the constant bitrates will give you the best battery performance. and, yes, the lower the bitrate the better. however, for me, anything below 190 i really don't like in regards to SQ.

 

[ElectricImages]

yeah, dont worry about the foobar stuff, I already made sense of it to myself...

 

[Brent Hutto]

If you compare differently-encoded files directly on your usual player, be sure you level match them exactly (it seems that the encoding can easily make a decibel or so of difference in the level) and do yourself a favor and let someone else switch between them where you don't know which is which.

If you know that one file is lossless and the other file is lossy encoded and a fraction of the size, you will hear a difference and the difference you hear will almost always be in favor of the supposedly better encoding. Funny how those difference disappear when you don't know which file is which.

Just don't waste 10-20 hours doing a bunch of non-blind AB comparisons. You can hear enough to make up your mind in a few minutes if you're not trying to nail it down with certainty.

 

[dreaded]

you can also consider CDex it's another nice ripper...
link

 

[jonnywolfet]

im suprised that no one has picked up on the fact you ar gonna use cx300's.
no to bash the headphones themselfs, but you wont be getting the potential of a high bitrate file through these headphones. i bet you would be pushed to be able to tell the difference between 192kbps and a lossless file.
if you are going to be using these headphones only i suggest you do some comparisons to see what you can live with.
if you plan on using it as a source for your hi-fi or you plan on upgrading your cans, igonore me.