 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)Monoid ...and 277 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2613477 Today 3 Topics 127503 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
You guys should check into this...I just got Music Match 7.2 and it can convert and rip things into that format. Its the same if not better quality as a regular mp3 but literally half the size! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I guess no one cares? Theres a plugin for winamp to... I got a good comparison set up here... www.geocities.com/hexen006 Portable mp3 players are going to be using this technology soon as well... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the trouble with all these other lossy audio formats is they are coming into a market place that's already chosen a standard, MP3, so they don't really stand a chance of getting widespread acceptance, however good they are... Ogg Vobis is a good example (.OGG files)...technically better than MP3 and open-source/no lisense involved but only a couple of devices support it... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The thing with mp3 plus is that they are still mp3's. All you need is a plugin and your good to go. I love it, and all 5000 of my mp3 are going to become mp3 pro files soon. If I convert I'm sure other people will. Winamp can play them Music Match can play them. A few media players for MAC's can play them. It's made my life better... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
these files are smaller than those made with ogg vorbis? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I got a few shared on IW server. I got u-ziq's Royal Astronoy and Bluff Limbo... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
And yes, they're smaller. Go to the site I listed above and see what I mean... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
maybe i will, thanks for the info. "All you need is a plugin and your good to go" same thing with ogg vorbis btw. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
But take and mp3 at 160kbs, an turn into an mp3 pro file and it's 50% smaller and sounds the same... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sounds unreal... but i'll give it a try. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
do you have the url for the encoder? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Music Match Jukebox will encode them great. I don't know if there is an encoder for winamp yet, but Music Match does a great job. It can convert mp3's to wav and mp3 pro, and vice versa. And allows Id3 tagging... Ha..I sound like I work these people... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
And here's two links to help answer more questions... http://www.mp3prozone.com/ http://www.mp3prozone.com/basics.htm Both have answers... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"The thing with mp3 plus is that they are still mp3's" Actually, that's not true, it's an incompatible format. That's why you need a plugin to play it in WinAmp. After having bit the bullet on one proprietary format (mp3), I'm not going to move to another. If I ever move, it will be to an open format like Ogg Vorbis. There's already one device with hardware support for Ogg, I'd expect to see more in the future. Winamp now plays Ogg "out of the box" as well. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Isn't that the format that only support up to 128kbps? Sure nice if you just want that but i prefer at least 192kbps when i encode. But that was a while sience, so maybe they have changed it. And about converting your whole collection; When the song is first made to mp3 it lost some info and the quality droped, maybe just a little but anyway. If you do it anothertime it sure as hell wont make it better.. only badder. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Top bitrate is 96kbps, I believe. Music encoding trends change from day to day, but the current thinking in some of the discussion groups that I follow is to use Ogg for low bitrate and MPC (Musepack) for high bitrate. Near CD quality at 96kbps is hard to believe, but there's no way for me to find out for myself since there are no encoders or decoders for Solaris or Linux. That's another problem ... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Actually they are still mp3's. THis isn't mp3+, it's mp3 pro. And the bitrate goes up to 96 which sounds better than 192. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
See, every mp3 player can play them but without the plugin it plays at 22500 frequency instead of the 44100. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I tried downloading one of your mp3pro files and playing it with a regular mp3 player. The song does play, but it sounds really bad without the high-frequency SBR mp3pro bit. So the format is backward compatible, but at such poor quality to be almost useless! Peter, one of the WinAmp developers, in a to the WinAmp board, recommends against using Windows Media and mp3pro for encoding. His sentiments are echoed by a lot of people. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I've gotta agree with that.... Also file size is becoming so less important now we have a lot quicker connection & storage space is getting cheap, cheap, cheap... I'll stick with me hiqual LAME-encoded MP3s...might take up more space but that's a small price to pay for the added quality... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
You gotta love the endless march of technology. We're quickly getting to the point where disk space is cheap enough that lossless encoding will be the way to go. I saw the first hardware player supporting FLAC (lossless, 50% smaller than WAV) the other day. Of course, by the time this happens, the Super Audio CD with its full 5.1 Dolby sound will be the new standard and we'll suddenly have 3x as much data to deal with. :-) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"We're quickly getting to the point where disk space is cheap enough that lossless encoding will be the way to go. I saw the first hardware player supporting FLAC (lossless, 50% smaller than WAV) the other day." It certainly is, I reckon we'll see an audio version of DVDs in a few years with 5.1 surround as standard. Cue re-releases of "remastered" old albums that make it sound like you're sitting in the middle of the band. They might wait till the follow up disks to DVDs (will use blue lasers), although really there's plenty of space on DVDs even for double albums in surround sound in lossless format. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Super Audio CD is already complete with full 5.1 sound and presumably loaded to the gills with copy protection. It will probably win the next format war because the players are backward-compatible with CDs. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Wow! What's the next step? Cds that go far beyond the audible frequency band, so dogs freak out when they hear it and there's more potential for hidden stuff? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I've gone to HiFi stores and listened to some demos of the SACD. It's quite hard to get the saledroids to demo a normal stereo CD vs stereo SACD just to hear the difference in dynamic range. I managed to do it on the sly and I couldn't hear any difference between the two, and I have pretty good hearing. The 5.1 sound is a totally different thing. They had a few demos there and they sound pretty good, but is it really needed for most music? I remember the quadrophonic sound that came out in the 70s and eventually failed. It would be interesting if bands would take advantage of the new format in creative ways, like the Flaming Lips did with their Zaireeka album, 4 CDs designed to play on 4 different stereos simultaneously. Maybe it's overkill ... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Really 5.1 is just an "effect", I can't see it having much use in most music and if all music starts using spiralling quadrophonic sound effects etc. it'll get boring pretty quickly. Hopefully they'll (musician) learn to use it subtly. I suppose stereo must have seemed a bit of a gimmick at the time, but that's used to good effect in lots of music. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
