Balance between bitrate and file size? I wonder what users find to be the best balance between file size and sound quality. I currently use 128kbps, but might want to reconsider.Thanks.11-16-2006I have noticed the "digital" effects of my 128kbps rips, and now wish I had started with at least 192 kbps. My main problem with 192 is the limited space of the 30 GB unit. Now there are larger capacity.I don't understand the responses from those who rip at a higher bit-rate than 192... I thought CDs were 192kbps. This must not be true if you can rip higher. Balance between bitrate and file size? I wonder what users find to be the best balance between file size and sound quality. I currently use 128kbps, but might want to reconsider. » Read More Balance between bitrate and file size? I wonder what users find to be the best balance between file size and sound quality. I currently use 128kbps, but might want to reconsider.Thanks.11-16-2006I have noticed the "digital" effects of my 128kbps rips, and now wish I had started with at least 192 kbps. My main problem with 192 is the limited space of the 30 GB unit. Now there are larger capacity.I don't understand the responses from those who rip at a higher bit-rate than 192... I thought CDs were 192kbps. This must not be true if you can rip higher. « Show Less
406004
I AM SHOCKED! No one has mentioned WMA format.The player's limit is 320kpbs with any format, and 64kbps on WMA is around the same quality as 320k on MP3, especially using earphones. I have converted 320k mp3 files into 64k wma files without noticing a difference. It's a shame if you put MP3s into this player.
406005
For the majority of people, 128 should be just fine. I use 192 just because I have a large cd collection and didn't want to say "Gee, I wish I had done all this at a better bit rate" when I was all done ripping my collection.
406006
Never EVER use anything below 192k. Anything below that and your music will have distortions to it. For me personally I use 320k since it's the best format... all though it takes up quite a bit more room but hey I don't mind.
406007
Honestly it all depends on what type of headphones/speakers you'll be using as to whether you'll get more out of better sound quality. My personal cutoff is 192kbps for the lowest I'll listen to, but I try to rip everything lossless and download everything I can at lossless quality because you really notice a difference at 900+kbps. But of course I'm using 500 dollar Sennheiser headphones to listen to the music, so if you're using 10 dollar Sony's you might not need anything near that high.
406008
Okay, saying that a 64kbps wma file has "around" the same sound quality as a 320 kbps mp3 file is an OUTRIGHT LIE.That is like saying the $5 phone at WalMart will provide you "around" the same sound quality as a hi-tech $200 office phone system.
406009
It's not JUST the bit rate.Some encoders are optimized for lower bit rates, some for higher bit rates. For instance, many commercial mp3 encoders are so heavily optimized for <128k encoding that they get hardly any better above 128k, and none after 160k.OTOH, some encoders, like bladeenc, an old free encoder, is heavily optimized for higher bit rate encodings, and at 256k is almost indistinguishable from the original audio signal off a CD. OTOH, bladeenc at 128k and below is practically unlistenable.It really depends on what you're encoding and all, but I hardly ever encode with less than 192k, and I almost always encode at 192k as a minimum, and more often at 220k or 256k. It's not JUST the bit rate.Some encoders are optimized for lower bit rates, some for higher bit rates. For instance, many commercial mp3 encoders are so heavily optimized for <128k encoding that they get hardly any better above 128k, and none after 160k.OTOH, some encoders, like bladeenc, an old free encoder, is heavily optimized for higher bit rate encodings, and at 256k is almost indistinguishable from the original audio signal off a CD. OTOH, bladeenc at 128k and below is practically unlistenable.It really depends on what you're encoding and all,... » Read More It's not JUST the bit rate.Some encoders are optimized for lower bit rates, some for higher bit rates. For instance, many commercial mp3 encoders are so heavily optimized for <128k encoding that they get hardly any better above 128k, and none after 160k.OTOH, some encoders, like bladeenc, an old free encoder, is heavily optimized for higher bit rate encodings, and at 256k is almost indistinguishable from the original audio signal off a CD. OTOH, bladeenc at 128k and below is practically unlistenable.It really depends on what you're encoding and all, but I hardly ever encode with less than 192k, and I almost always encode at 192k as a minimum, and more often at 220k or 256k. « Show Less
406010
ariadne is absolutely correct here.For lower bitrates, wma is generally better than mp3At higher bitrates, mp3 is generally better than mp3.Ogg is better at both but sadly, the zen doesn't support ogg.Bladeenc mp3 encoder (free software, runs from the command line) has almost the exact same quality as the original CD at 320kb/s
618565
yes. I put a 11gb MKV of a bluray rip. Played fine. The MKV was on a thumbdrive which was formatted NTFS
1314314
The are both the same crappy MP3 format!! If you care about audio quality you will use Apple Lossless. The trouble is this prevents you from D/L Songs or Albums. The best way is to buy the CD and rip it to iTunes. You can change the format you rip it in "Preferences" on iTunes....Import...format. You can however go to HDtracks.com and get great Audio Quality D/L's although their selection is not probably what you are looking for and more expensive than just buy the CD. Magoo I know D/L is convenient but it returns horrible quality!!!!! Take any CD you know very well and rip a song or two to iTunes in Apple LossLess. Then D/L that same song(s) and you should be able to easily hear the difference! If you just want background noise then continue to D/L the MP3's. Life is all about priorities!!! Magoo
1126699
Haven't tried that. I will give it a go today or tomorrow. Get back to me then. So I tested the unit on both program content and commercial content. Both were in the range of 38-40 db. Didn't see any difference in the sound level between them.
1792301
i formatted a 64gb card as fat32 and it reads it perfectly. once 128gb micro sd cards come down in price im going to try that as well. the limitations on the cards were set because those were the largest cards at the time, and everything above those sizes generally cant be formatted in a readable format for the player without using 3rd party software (which you can get for free)
1050541
There are none. The only reason I use the 8.5GBs disc is because I do video files that often exceed 4GBs in size. It allows me to retain a higher quality video without having to split the video between two disc. If space is not a problem then having two instead of one is OK. Most cases, however, only safely store one disc per unit.
1180108
Thank you.Basically, the problem I got is the pause between the clips when I write them to a DVD. So, I joined them (and the pause problom is solved) and tried to fit it to a 4.7 GB (which apparently holds 4.38GB data). And if the total size is less than 4.38GB, I could write the DVD. Else, I had to separate the single cip (which I joined before) and remove some of the clips and see how many are getting fit in 4.38GB. I think I could write it. Of course, I have to write a second DVD for rest of the clips. Thank you
2248023
If you look at the device your question is being asked about you will see that it states that it is a 4 GB drive. If you want to have the effective capacity of an 8 GB drive in number of songs then simply reduce the bitrate by half and reconvert your songs. For example if the bitrate for your MP3 songs are all at 320 kbps then simply re-convert using a bitrate of 156 kbps or the closest allowable number. You should not be able to hear much if any difference between the two bitrates.
685102
The size issue isn't a "formatting issue" like most people believe. It's actually due to the discrepancy between what storage manufacturers define as a byte VS what actually *IS* a byte. Storage manufacturers consider a kilobyte as "1000 bytes" when it is actually 1024 bytes (due to the binary system working in exponents of 2). So if you extrapolate out 32*1000*1000*1000 (32 Gigabytes, as defined by Sandisk) then divide that by 1024*1024*1024 it puts you at 29.8 GB. The .09 GB remainder could certainly be filesystem information, I suppose.So, yeah, basically all data storage manufacturers are lying to you, and as you increase your storage size the discrepancy percentage increases. The size issue isn't a "formatting issue" like most people believe. It's actually due to the discrepancy between what storage manufacturers define as a byte VS what actually *IS* a byte. Storage manufacturers consider a kilobyte as "1000 bytes" when it is actually 1024 bytes (due to the binary system working in exponents of 2). So if you extrapolate out 32*1000*1000*1000 (32 Gigabytes, as defined by Sandisk) then divide that by 1024*1024*1024 it puts you at 29.8 GB. The .09 GB remainder could certainly be filesystem information, I suppose.So, yeah, basically... » Read More The size issue isn't a "formatting issue" like most people believe. It's actually due to the discrepancy between what storage manufacturers define as a byte VS what actually *IS* a byte. Storage manufacturers consider a kilobyte as "1000 bytes" when it is actually 1024 bytes (due to the binary system working in exponents of 2). So if you extrapolate out 32*1000*1000*1000 (32 Gigabytes, as defined by Sandisk) then divide that by 1024*1024*1024 it puts you at 29.8 GB. The .09 GB remainder could certainly be filesystem information, I suppose.So, yeah, basically all data storage manufacturers are lying to you, and as you increase your storage size the discrepancy percentage increases. « Show Less
1989465
It does 3 minute files by default, there r settings to change the default file length,There is no gap between files if u play them together with a computer, all your driving will b there :)
1408037
No limit on my micro sdhc card. I use 8G card record music at 128 kbps got about 145 hours play time (higher kbps will not sound better due to small speaker). I did not use folder and sub folder on sd card.
1813387
Thanks for the info, guys. I use Windows XP, plan on downloading well over 4GB in musical CDs, audiobooks, and mp3's, so, if I'm reading you right, I SHOULD reformat to NTFS. Is this correct? And thanks again for your help.
1781813
Thanks for the info. That was exactly the type of information I was looking for. I don't think the audio will make a difference to me. I'm very new to the HD community and by the time I get around to surround sound, something else will be out there. I read your review of the 570; very good review, nice and detailed. (I was thinking that if I decided on the 570, I might just add a few more dollars and get a PS3. It's the only bluray player I've actually used.) I was glad to read that you liked the upconversion. I've got too many DVDs and want to make sure my bluray player will do a good job on those. Again, thanks. Thanks for the info. That was exactly the type of information I was looking for. I don't think the audio will make a difference to me. I'm very new to the HD community and by the time I get around to surround sound, something else will be out there. I read your review of the 570; very good review, nice and detailed. (I was thinking that if I decided on the 570, I might just add a few more dollars and get a PS3. It's the only bluray player I've actually used.) I was glad to read that you liked the upconversion. I've got too many DVDs and want to make sure my bluray player will do a good job... » Read More Thanks for the info. That was exactly the type of information I was looking for. I don't think the audio will make a difference to me. I'm very new to the HD community and by the time I get around to surround sound, something else will be out there. I read your review of the 570; very good review, nice and detailed. (I was thinking that if I decided on the 570, I might just add a few more dollars and get a PS3. It's the only bluray player I've actually used.) I was glad to read that you liked the upconversion. I've got too many DVDs and want to make sure my bluray player will do a good job on those. Again, thanks. « Show Less
751002
I have a 4 gig card in mine which isn't even half full. We took a trip of over 20 hours and didn't hear the same song twice. However, it doesn't handle subfiles well so we tend to just let it play. For the money, it's a good value.
789204
I have only tried it with 2gb. I read somwhere it won't handle anything higher. You might be able to get away with more if you use folders with only 2gb in it. If you are interested I could try it and let you know. By the way, mine works great, this was probably the best tape/mpe idea I have ever had! I love mine.
1844995
Unless there has been an update, it will only recognize up to 32gb. If you are not using extremely large files there is no need for it. The player will only "see" up to 8000 files. It Has a cap of 4000 mp3 or audio files and 4000 other files. I have heard of people "hacking" the device to remove the file limits, but I'm not that good with computers and such and didn't want to risk damaging mine. I have a little over 2000 mp3s on mine and it has taken up about 16gb. I have heard of some people having luck with larger sd cards but some do not, it's hit and miss depending on what software version it has I guess. I have a 32gb for mine but have never used it. Unless there has been an update, it will only recognize up to 32gb. If you are not using extremely large files there is no need for it. The player will only "see" up to 8000 files. It Has a cap of 4000 mp3 or audio files and 4000 other files. I have heard of people "hacking" the device to remove the file limits, but I'm not that good with computers and such and didn't want to risk damaging mine. I have a little over 2000 mp3s on mine and it has taken up about 16gb. I have heard of some people having luck with larger sd cards but some do not, it's hit and miss depending... » Read More Unless there has been an update, it will only recognize up to 32gb. If you are not using extremely large files there is no need for it. The player will only "see" up to 8000 files. It Has a cap of 4000 mp3 or audio files and 4000 other files. I have heard of people "hacking" the device to remove the file limits, but I'm not that good with computers and such and didn't want to risk damaging mine. I have a little over 2000 mp3s on mine and it has taken up about 16gb. I have heard of some people having luck with larger sd cards but some do not, it's hit and miss depending on what software version it has I guess. I have a 32gb for mine but have never used it. « Show Less
1933521
P. Vo's right, you can burn the MP3s to a CD, but I thought it was worth mentioning that you should encode the MP3s at around 192kbps or higher to get the best quality when you burn to CD (too much above 192kbps won't make a difference to most people; I believe "they" have done studies to prove that you can't distinguish quality difference above this threshold, but it's up to you).Just don't encode at 128 kbps and expect the CD to be crystal clear...