Support and General Use > Audio Playback, Database and Playlists

Best lossy format to convert to for Rockbox?

<< < (2/3) > >>

Llorean:
What kind of "features" are you talking about?

StsIkel:
I'm no expert, but OGG decoding uses more CPU than MP3 or Musepack. So battery life will be a little bit less there.

In terms of playability however, ogg is probably better supported for the long-run and for other hardware and software than MPC. I've had about 100 CDs re-ripped to the 4 formats i've used in the last 8 years - MP3, M4A, MPC, OGG, and most are either still there or back to MP3 again now. When they were musepacked, I found they were not only bigger than the equivalent ogg files, but that I could do very little with them outside of rockbox.

The most useful thing you can do is conduct a blind listening test as it's the only way to find out which psycho-acoustic encoding model best suits you and at which bitrate... I get transparency between Q6 and Q8 in ogg files for instance but it might be higher if you listen to lossless all the time.

sa3atsky:

--- Quote from: StsIkel on November 18, 2008, 07:47:23 AM ---I'm no expert, but OGG decoding uses more CPU than MP3 or Musepack. So battery life will be a little bit less there.

In terms of playability however, ogg is probably better supported for the long-run and for other hardware and software than MPC. I've had about 100 CDs re-ripped to the 4 formats i've used in the last 8 years - MP3, M4A, MPC, OGG, and most are either still there or back to MP3 again now. When they were musepacked, I found they were not only bigger than the equivalent ogg files, but that I could do very little with them outside of rockbox.

The most useful thing you can do is conduct a blind listening test as it's the only way to find out which psycho-acoustic encoding model best suits you and at which bitrate... I get transparency between Q6 and Q8 in ogg files for instance but it might be higher if you listen to lossless all the time.

--- End quote ---

Thanks for the useful reply, I'm going to do a test-run to choose between the three, good tip about the battery life, ill keep that in mind...

Multiplex:
The best sounding codec is a matter of personal taste (and can vary depending on what coder you use) - this is debated with religious fervor over at Hydrogen Audio.

For codec efficiency on Rockbox there is this Wiki page http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/CodecPerformanceComparison results are platform and build dependant with minor code optimisations happening fairly often.

Also, don't forget that if you rate codec X@128kbps as equivalent to codec Y@150kbps you have to factor that in to the efficiency decision - you can't just compare codec X and Y at 128 kbps.

Zardoz:
I'd go with mp3 if I were you. It works everywhere. mpc maybe sounds best but the difference is marginal.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page