Why lossless on portables?
Apr 22, 2008 at 7:59 AM Post #136 of 262
I use lossless simply because I don't have a mini-mini HD. Not even on my portable. Well, used. Lossless causes more HD spinning, and wears out the battery in no time. OGG at 3-400kbps sounds equally good out of a portable system, and with background noise, you can safely do down into the 200s. With lots of background noise, you really should turn it off!
 
Apr 22, 2008 at 8:33 AM Post #137 of 262
Quote:

Originally Posted by ADD /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Hi,

I compress to Ogg 500 kbit ABR, and although I prefer the result to maximum bitrate MP3, I can still hear this "volume" or lack of "fowardness" issue even when the output volumes are precisely matched. Infact I still hear it even if the output volume of an Ogg or MP3 is slightly higher than the original WAV file. It does not take miraculous equipment to hear this difference. Just a $20 CMoy, a pair of Sennheiser PXC350s and a good pair of ears are all it takes.



It's mostly because you're using standard ogg Vorbis encoder instead of aoTuV - currently R2 is the most recent version. Switch to this and you won't distinguish from lossless even from the HD25-1's as I don't. The regular ogg Vorbis is not quite transparent till highest bitrates, although still better than the 320kb/s mp3.
 
Apr 22, 2008 at 5:27 PM Post #138 of 262
I came to this thread late and use lossless on my IPod classic with LOD to UE TF10 through the RSA predator and I can definitely hear the difference between lossless and AAC files of the same songs and even did A/B testing and can tell. Just my 2 cents.
 
Apr 23, 2008 at 4:53 AM Post #140 of 262
Quote:

Originally Posted by Night Surfer /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Are algorythms as good as geobushythms?


What, no rim shot...?
 
Apr 23, 2008 at 5:07 AM Post #141 of 262
Quote:

Originally Posted by majkel /img/forum/go_quote.gif
It's mostly because you're using standard ogg Vorbis encoder instead of aoTuV - currently R2 is the most recent version.


Hi,

I am happy to give it a go. I have heard of the one you mention but that is about it. Any suggestion as to how to use it? I have been using dbpoweramp and the standard encoder at 500 kbps. Whilst the result sounds good, I am still a bit frustrated at the loss of quality when I compare the ogg file with the original wav file, even though it is still better than MP3.


EDIT: I just notice that dbpoweramp have this codec available (did not see it before). That makes it much easier to try. I'll let you know if I prefer it.
 
Apr 23, 2008 at 5:38 AM Post #142 of 262
Hi again Majkel,

I've just been mucking around with that Ogg Vorbis aoTuV encoder on a few PCM 16-48 files I have been working on. The one I downloaded was something called "lancer" which has optimisations for SSE/2/3, so it seems to run pretty fast too.

Although I have not mucked around extensively yet, I do have to say that yes - I am thus far very impressed with it. And no, I don't feel that I can hear any difference between my original 16-48 PCM file and one encoded using this particular Ogg Vorbis encoder when set to 500 Kpbs at a constant bitrate (at least with the files I have thus far experimented upon). I did hear differences between the average bitrate 500 setting and variable bitrate 500 setting versus the PCM - but not the constant bitrate 500 versus PCM (to my ears the ABR 500 and VBR 500 settings sound about the same as the 500 CBR setting on the standard codec).

This would seem to be a very good option for me to experiment with. I have thus far been frustrated at the drop in quality as soon as I compress - no matter what codec and bitrate - and had even got to the point of contemplating the purchase of an old DAT machine or one of those portable recorders such as an Edirol or Marantz that can play back uncompressed PCM at higher than CD resolution.

If I can get away with using this aoTuV codec then I could potentially save myself a lot of money and frustration.
 
Apr 23, 2008 at 10:08 AM Post #144 of 262
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dublo7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
What would you guys say is the best alternative to lossless for a Cowon D2?


OGG.
 
Apr 23, 2008 at 10:34 AM Post #146 of 262
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dublo7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
What would you guys say is the best alternative to lossless for a Cowon D2?

320kbps Mp3?



V0 mp3s. Transparent for most music.
 
Apr 24, 2008 at 8:38 PM Post #147 of 262
Only my CD backups are lossless (about 20% of my collection).
The rest is MP3, 80% of my MP3's have lower bit rates than 320.
frown.gif

What I have lossless (Apple Lossless for this matter), I put it on my ipod as lossless aswell. It fits on my 80gig iPod, so who cares? lol
 
Apr 25, 2008 at 4:14 AM Post #148 of 262
I recorded some of Bach's cantatas using either Apple lossless or mp3 320 vbr using my 2g Nano with the Headsix and DT 880 Pro's and listen to them a few seconds each at a time, several times, paying attention to the organ, cello, violin, choir and individual voices. There was a difference, but not a large difference. You could hear more.....spacious and full sound (poor descriptions I know). If I had enough space in my laptop (320 gigs) for my music I would use lossless, but as it stands, I have close to 80 gigs of mp3 320's.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top