[Duxxy]

I've tried every major format out there... MP3 of all types, AAC and OGG

AAC i didn't like at all (i only use the higher quality versions)
MP3 is nice for it's size but it's still not cd quality
I like OGG above the others (just a personal preference) but nevertheless... still not cd quality

Uncompressed is great but takes up lots of space

What about FLAC though? I can tell the difference between any of the above sound formats but i cannot tell the difference between a FLAC encoded song and the uncompressed WAV of the song.

My question basically is... why isn't there a portable player than can natively play .FLAC files? Is there one planned in the future?

 

[jpburton5150]

the rio karma can play FLAC right? and i thought FLAC was lossless anyway...

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

Rio karma plays FLAC

and yes, FLAC IS lossless, which means, same quality as .WAV

mind telling us what are u using to encode OGG, ACC, and MP3?
and what bitrate are u using?

edit: just check out ur gear, im surprised u can hear the difference between well encoded MP3, OGG and ACC

 

[blessingx]

Yeah, I'm curious about which encoders were used also, especially the "higher quality" AAC one.

As others have said, just the Karma at the moment.

 

[Duxxy]

Sure

EAC in secure mode with the lame encoder to VBR MP3's (i've tried 192 and 128)
Itunes for encoding AAC 320kbps
EAC in secure mode with Garfs encoder at quality level 6 for ogg

edit: good to know that at least one player supports .FLAC.
now if only iRiver updates their firmware on the imp550 to play it i'd be all set.

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

wow...now im even more suprised, looks like you are using good encodings. so are you sure u can hear the difference from your SR60s? or is that your brain telling ur ear that the music ur listing to isnt as good as wav?

for EAC lame, are u sure ur using VBR? you said u tried 128 and 192, shouldnt that be CRB?

for lame, i suggest alt-preset-standerd VBR 192-320
and if you still dont think OGG q6 is good enough, i recomand OGG GT3b1, it improves more at higher bitrate..

what about ACC?

 

[Duxxy]

wow...now im even more suprised, looks like you are using good encodings. so are you sure u can hear the difference from your SR60s? or is that your brain telling ur ear that the music ur listing to isnt as good as wav?

Dunno... i hear what i hear. Could i tell which was which in a blind test? Not really sure. I could just be nuts of course

for EAC lame, are u sure ur using VBR? you said u tried 128 and 192, shouldnt that be CRB?

Well in EAC in the compression window even when you use the alt preset it still has a list of bit rates... i assumed the VBR was more centered around the selected bit rate. Can i assume it's not?

AAC was encoded with itunes at 320kbps

What is the highest quality setting for ogg anyway?

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

CBR = same bitrate throughout the whole song
VBR= bitrate goes up and down depending on needs

in EAC, the code "--alt-preset standard %s %d" is what decides the bitrate your mp3s will encode as

q10 is highest for OGG, which is 500kbps

nice to see ur using iTunes for ACC, iTunes (QuickTime) had been reviewed as best ACC encoder

 

[Rizumu]

Does the Karma also support Ogg Vorbis?

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

yes

 

[blessingx]

Yep. You can probably assume anything supporting FLAC will support Ogg, now that they're under one umbrella.

 

[adhoc]

i use lame 3.92 320cbr alogorithm quality 0 cutoff 20500hz mp3s with my imp400/ksc35 for classical, and unfortunately i can clearly hear the difference if i were to use the original cd.

it's painfully obvious if you pay attention to the string section. the 'texture' is lost - the encoding seems to smear the entire string section somewhat. i also got ringing artifacts at times. terrible.

can anyone with experience assure me that ogg at the highest possible quality will be better than my mp3s?

 

[akio]

on my home setup, the difference between my admittedly crappy MP3 burns and a real CD is HUGE. the most obvious differences is soundstage. I believe i can tell the difference between burned cds and pressed ones, too.

 

[ProFingerSk8er]

adhoc, ouch....ringing, that's not good. give OGG a try...from my experience (not very much compare to everyone else here) i was very pleased with OGG compared to lame mp3s at same bitrate

akio, "the difference between my admittedly crappy MP3 burns and a real CD is HUGE"
there's your problem

crappy mp3s

im sure if we all listen carfully we can all hear the difference between well-encoded formats and CDs, but i think we'r forgeting the whole point, portable use. im sure there are sonic differences, but arnt they close enough for portable use already?

other people already think we'r crazy that we put soo much effert into format differeces just for portable use.. they dont even do that for home use

 

[nales]

Quote:

Originally posted by adhoc i use lame 3.92 320cbr alogorithm quality 0 cutoff 20500hz mp3s with my imp400/ksc35 for classical, and unfortunately i can clearly hear the difference if i were to use the original cd.

no you can't! why are you lying to us, man?!

classical is not difficult to encode, you snob....