what format to rip using windows media player.

I rip through windows media player and just noticed that the format I am ripping in is windows media audio, and not mp3.   Should I be ripping in mp3? What’s the differance in the formats?

Yes, rip in mp3. You can adjust the quality level, and you should use at least 192 kbps.

Mp3 and .wma at similar bitrates will probably sound pretty much the same. Some people think .wma can pack a little more music into slightly fewer bitrates (like 160 vs. 192). Others don’t. The difference is that .wma and .mp3 each have different opinions about what information can be thrown out to scrunch music down to smaller filesizes.  If you were listening through a fantastic playback system, you might possibly be able to identify the differences–and they are differences in approach, not decreases in quality. But at pretty high bitrates, like 192 kbps and up, they are not significantly different. 

The big reason to use .mp3 is that every gadget out there plays mp3. You won’t ever have to rip your albums again. Not every gadget plays .wma–there’s this obscure little player called the dopI, or something like that, that doesn’t play .wma. 

And if you don’t use .wma, you’re not making Micro$oft more smug. 

If you want to really be an audio geek, Windows Media Player doesn’t do the best mp3 rips (because it wants you to use .wma), though they are decent enough. Assuming you are only using WMP as a ripper, and not for synching/playlisting, you could also get the free Media Monkey at www.mediamonkey.com and use its better ripper, LAME. You need to go to www.lame.org and get the official lame_enc.dll to substitute for the one in Media Monkey, which times out.

But if you don’t want to geek out, mp3s ripped through WMP at 192 or above are good enough quality for all your mobile needs.  

Message Edited by Black-Rectangle on 04-26-2010 07:16 PM

Welp, I started reripping last night. I realized today that I don’t really need to resync, not yet anyway.

I wish I looked at that when I started, I ripped almost every cd I own!! I’m just going to do a few a day for now though.

mcostas wrote:

Welp, I started reripping last night. I realized today that I don’t really need to resync, not yet anyway.

 

I wish I looked at that when I started, I ripped almost every cd I own!! I’m just going to do a few a day for now though.

If the rips already on your player work, then don’t rush to re-rip. Contrary to what the tinfoil hat people think, you didn’t just make more money for Microsoft by ripping your CD’s in wma. If you want to re-rip to mp3, that’s fine! But do it at your leisure, and enjoy the player and tunes(that are already on it) while you go.:smiley:

That’s kind of what I’m doing now. If I just do most of them I’ll feel better.

Now that I have jumped on the mp3 bandwagon I won’t be getting off. I imagine I’ll be getting another someday for whatever reason. I don’t know why I didn’t put my cd’s on the computer at least, I guess I was afraid of filling it up.

mcostas wrote:

That’s kind of what I’m doing now. If I just do most of them I’ll feel better.

 

Now that I have jumped on the mp3 bandwagon I won’t be getting off. I imagine I’ll be getting another someday for whatever reason. I don’t know why I didn’t put my cd’s on the computer at least, I guess I was afraid of filling it up.

I know what you mean…I have 131GB worth on my computer.:smileyvery-happy:

I agree with Marvin–no need to re-rip everything. Just do mp3s going forward.

When you do, inevitably, get an external hard drive–go for a terabyte–you can also think about ripping to FLAC, the Free Lossless Audio Codec, which preserves every bit of the sound from your CDs at a reduced size (though perhaps  5x larger than mp3). That’s an archive in case you lose the CDs. Then you’d probably convert those to mp3 when you transferred them to the player–although it can play FLACs, too.  But unless your playback is a good home stereo, you are unlikely to hear the difference between high-bitrate mp3 and FLAC. You definitely won’t through typical earbuds. 

Am I missing something?  Seems kind of wasted labour to re-rip everything into Mp3, unless you are unhappy with the SQ with .wma or planning to get one of those dreaded dopi things.  I have a mixture of wma and mp3 and they happily co-exist.  I can’t say one format is superior over the other, to my ears anyway.  I dunno.  Maybe it’s just me, but I wouldn’t go out of my way to re-rip into mp3, if I had said CDs already in .wma.

To each their own, I guess.  And maybe I’m buying the wrong players, but every player I’ve owned supported the .wma format.  I guess I’m not one of the sheep.

fuze_owner-GB wrote:

Am I missing something?  Seems kind of wasted labour to re-rip everything into Mp3, unless you are unhappy with the SQ with .wma or planning to get one of those dreaded dopi things.  I have a mixture of wma and mp3 and they happily co-exist.  I can’t say one format is superior over the other, to my ears anyway.  I dunno.  Maybe it’s just me, but I wouldn’t go out of my way to re-rip into mp3, if I had said CDs already in .wma.

 

To each their own, I guess.  And maybe I’m buying the wrong players, but every player I’ve owned supported the .wma format.  I guess I’m not one of the sheep.

You saw Black-Rectangle’s hat and workspace, didn’t you? Trying to keep those Microsoft people from making a living, even though he uses their operating system on his computer? :smileyvery-happy:

I also have a mixture of FLAC, WMA, and MP3…but I make my WMA’s with 3rd party apps, not WMP. :wink:

Message Edited by Marvin_Martian on 04-28-2010 12:21 PM

@marvin_martian wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:

Am I missing something?  Seems kind of wasted labour to re-rip everything into Mp3, unless you are unhappy with the SQ with .wma or planning to get one of those dreaded dopi things.  I have a mixture of wma and mp3 and they happily co-exist.  I can’t say one format is superior over the other, to my ears anyway.  I dunno.  Maybe it’s just me, but I wouldn’t go out of my way to re-rip into mp3, if I had said CDs already in .wma.

 

To each their own, I guess.  And maybe I’m buying the wrong players, but every player I’ve owned supported the .wma format.  I guess I’m not one of the sheep.


You saw Black-Rectangle’s hat and workspace, didn’t you? Trying to keep those Microsoft people from making a living, even though he uses their operating system on his computer? :smileyvery-happy:

OK…I see. Call me an idiot or a fool, but I rather like .wma.  I have all my CDs in FLAC and rip (convert) to either .wma or mp3 as the mood strikes.  Once the CD is ripped, unless there is a sound quality problem, I rarely go back to make it specifically either .wma or mp3.  Both work fine on all of my players, and while listening can rarely tell without looking if it is a .wma or .mp3.

Message Edited by fuze_owner-GB on 04-28-2010 12:24 PM

fuze_owner-GB wrote:


@marvin_martian wrote:


@fuze_owner_gb wrote:

Am I missing something?  Seems kind of wasted labour to re-rip everything into Mp3, unless you are unhappy with the SQ with .wma or planning to get one of those dreaded dopi things.  I have a mixture of wma and mp3 and they happily co-exist.  I can’t say one format is superior over the other, to my ears anyway.  I dunno.  Maybe it’s just me, but I wouldn’t go out of my way to re-rip into mp3, if I had said CDs already in .wma.

 

To each their own, I guess.  And maybe I’m buying the wrong players, but every player I’ve owned supported the .wma format.  I guess I’m not one of the sheep.


You saw Black-Rectangle’s hat and workspace, didn’t you? Trying to keep those Microsoft people from making a living, even though he uses their operating system on his computer? :smileyvery-happy:


OK…I see. Call me an idiot or a fool, but I rather like .wma.  I have all my CDs in FLAC and rip (convert) to either .wma or mp3 as the mood strikes.  Once the CD is ripped, unless there is a sound quality problem, I rarely go back to make it specifically either .wma or mp3.  Both work fine on all of my players, and while listening can rarely tell without looking if it is a .wma or .mp3.

Message Edited by fuze_owner-GB on 04-28-2010 12:24 PM

Agreed!

There is a good chance I will get another mp3 player and I want everything to be compatible. It’s easier just to do it now before there is more stuff on it.

I had a brief wheel problem today which caused me to fly into a panic and pop the case. It didn’t help so I “reset” it. I don’t think it really reset but it seems to have fixed the problem.

I have gotten spoiled in the few days I have had my fuze. It was like when I got my handheld gps, it opened up a new world, bushwackin’ and not gettin’ all lost and stuff. :smileyvery-happy:

I am going to the gym later and couldn’t bear the thought of not being able to listen to my fuze!!! I would have gotten out and gotten another if I couldn’t fix it or had to send it in!! 

I may get an ipod later and keep the fuze as a backup. I’m sure there will be times I prefer it, I don’t know that much about ipods, only that they do even more crap!

Not matter what brand I get, I didn’t catalogu all this stuff on my computer only to stop using it!

So for compatibility I want stuff to be in mp3.

This is so fun!!!  I’m going through everything and rating songs at the moment!  I also went through my music library on my computer and changed some of the genres. It had avenged sevenfold as alternative!!!  I changed it to metal. It had eclectic as rock!!!  I changed it to folk. I am going to rip and edit till I think I’m done, then I’m going to reformat and load the stuff on. It seems easier to do that then select only some.

What do y’all do when you rip a bunch of new stuff. do you select only the new stuff or just sync it all? Will it make dupes if you sync all, or does it only put on the new stuff?

I can’t think of any player besides dopi that doesn’t support .wma…but if mp3 floats yer boat… have fun…

I did agree with you that there’s no reason to re-rip albums that work as .wma.

But for me, .wma and Apple’s .aac are equally bad choices because they are not universal.

In older versions of Windows Media Player, the default rip was .wma that was copy-protected–i.e., crippled. That was enough to make me spurn .wma. Apparently enough pressure was put on Microsoft so that later WMPs did not have that default, but yes, I bear a grudge.

Since dopI players dominate the market, and mcostas might want to trade albums with dopI users, it does make sense to use mp3. 

Oh, I actually don’t just wear tinfoil hats but cover my entire body in tinfoil, including in the shower.  And I don’t really worry about Microsoft’s poor downtrodden workers getting paid.

Just a Q: Have you ever dealt with Microsoft’s customer support? I once paid them $35 for a phone support call to fix a soundcard software problem. I thought they were giving me a permanent fix. They gave me a workaround that died the next time I rebooted. I haven’t been too fond of them ever since. 

Anybody that bases their collection format on compatibility with dopi products is on their own! :smileyvery-happy: :wink:

Message Edited by TomJensen on 05-03-2010 05:23 PM

@tomjensen wrote:

There’s a pragmatic reason to rip to MP3, at least WRT the Fuze: its MP3 decoder is optimized, whereas WMA is an unknown. This may mean longer operating time.

Perhaps someone would do a battery rundown test for MP3 vs WMA (of same bitrate) and tell us how each fares on the Fuze.

 

Edit: Nothing that a search on “WMA battery life” can’t ferret out. Per Sansafix (one of the Sandisk dudes):

 

>In addition to bitrate,  the choice of the decoder and DRM affects the battery  life.  MP3 format gives about 20% better battery life than WMA  at the same bitrate.  Also, Protected content takes more CPU cycles.

>For example:
>16 to 17 hours is possible with MP3, 128K bitrate
>10 to 11 hours is possible for WMA 160K,  protected  (Rhapsody Content).

Message Edited by TomJensen on 04-29-2010 11:38 AM

While I don’t argue with your findings, your examples are a tad deceptive; in that you are comparing best case MP3 vs. worse case WMA.  In real world applications, with a variety of music files on most of my players, I don’t see much of a difference in battery life with MP3 vs. WMA.

Granted, I haven’t used a Fuze as my primary player in ages, so this occurance may be more reflective in Sandisk’s engineering expertise than the codec itself.  

Frankly, I’m not going to worry much about it.  I like WMA…you may like something different.  That’s why most media players come with support for more than one codec, because everyone’s tastes and needs are different.

Message Edited by TomJensen on 05-03-2010 05:23 PM

@tomjensen wrote:
The OP’s question isn’t what you or I like, or what’s popular. It’s what is the “best” codec to use for the Fuze. The answer given by the Sandisk tech is pretty clear-cut. You may quibble about “engineering expertise” all you want, but the fact is that the OP has a Fuze, and isn’t about to run out and get another brand per your say-so.

There is no opinion here.

Does a slightly longer battery life make MP3 superior?  Not in my eyes.  Everything being equal, I tend to like the sound signature of WMA a bit better than MP3.  The original poster may feel the same… or not…; it’s certainly not going to hurt to try them both for awhile.

It’s not as neatly cut and dried as you make it out to be.

Now THAT certainly is your opinion. I noted that you’ve provided to empirical data to back it up. Which is fine. Suffice it to say that mine differs from yours. Which makes it a wash.

What is NOT an opinion, however, is the Sandisk tech’s info that MP3 is more optimized on the Fuze than WMA, and the Fuze will run longer playing MP3s. That, since you seem to be confused about such things, is a FACT.