Best lossy codec? (Clip/Clip +)

Been converting to FLAC w/ compression level 2 for tunes on my Clip. Trying compression level 8 to free up more space but finding that difference in file size not that great. Considering moving to lossy codec & wondering if people have recommendations. Have looked into it a little. Thinking of MP3 or Ogg Vorbis? Thoughts?

Vorbis is superior to mp3. I’m too lazy to search for tests (Google and ye shall find), but from what I know ogg gives the same quality as mp3 while taking about 2/3 of the disk space. Or, to put it another way, it offers noticeably superior quality at the same bitrates.

Have heard similarly as to Vorbis. Unfortunately, it’s not nearly as universal as MP3, should you want to use your compressed tunes on other devices.

Are you using rockbox or the Sandisk firmware?  If the Sandisk firmware I recommend MP3, everything else gets poor battery life.  If rockbox, it doesn’t really matter, both are quite efficient.  

Thanks to all for the advice. Just occurred to me there may be other good options. Any other recommendations?

@saratoga wrote:

Are you using rockbox or the Sandisk firmware?  If the Sandisk firmware I recommend MP3, everything else gets poor battery life.  If rockbox, it doesn’t really matter, both are quite efficient.  

QFT.

QFT? I’m new to this so don’t know what that means. Forgot to clarify in earlier post that I’m running the Sansa firmware not Rockbox.

QFT=“quoted for truth”. It’s netspeak (internet slang) for “this guy/girl is exactly right”.

@jimmanko wrote:

 

Considering moving to lossy codec & wondering if people have recommendations. Have looked into it a little. Thinking of MP3 or Ogg Vorbis? Thoughts?

 

 

I don’t have any experience with OGG files, but there are many fans out there. For the widest compatibility though, if you plan on using the files on more than one player I’d suggest .mp3 format at a high bit-rate. Personally, I find 256kbps to be a good compromise betweeen file size and sound quality.

 

WMA is good too, but like OGG it isn’t supported on all portable players.

 

I use MP3 for similar reasons, but rip using variable bitrate, setting the bottom end at 192 kbps and the top end at 320 kbps–a good compromise of size/sound for me.

Guys, does using higher bitrate mean more load on player’s processor or vise versa? I would like to use common bitrate like 128 but if it puts strain on processor, let me know.

Higher bitrates have very slightly higher CPU use, since the entropy decode stage will involve a little more data processing.

And 128 kbps really is fairly low at this point for music–I recommend 192 or greater, and possibly variable bit rate (VBR) to enhance the sound further.

@miikerman wrote:

And 128 kbps really is fairly low at this point for music–I recommend 192 or greater, and possibly variable bit rate (VBR) to enhance the sound further.

Information on how to pick a bitrate: http://www.anythingbutipod.com/forum/showpost.php?p=604619&postcount=1.

@miikerman wrote:

And 128 kbps really is fairly low at this point for music–I recommend 192 or greater, and possibly variable bit rate (VBR) to enhance the sound further.

But how can you hear the difference between this little range of bitrate? I could hear difference between 64 kbps and 320 kbps, but between 128 kbps and 192 kbps? Same to me.

" But how can you hear the difference between this little range of bitrate? I could hear difference between 64 kbps and 320 kbps, but between 128 kbps and 192 kbps? Same to me. ."

If you can’t hear the difference between 128kbps and 192kbps, then perhaps you might benefit from better earphones? I have no trouble hearing the difference between 128kbps mp3 and 192kbps. I also hear the difference between 192kbps and 256kbps. Imo 128kbps sounds bad, while 192 kbps sounds good but like it is missing something. I can’t hear the difference between 256kbps and 320 kbps  mp3.

@boris_yo wrote:


@miikerman wrote:

And 128 kbps really is fairly low at this point for music–I recommend 192 or greater, and possibly variable bit rate (VBR) to enhance the sound further.


 

But how can you hear the difference between this little range of bitrate? I could hear difference between 64 kbps and 320 kbps, but between 128 kbps and 192 kbps? Same to me.

Depends on the genre, but yeah, theres not as much difference as most people imply. For metal I would say 128k is a bit low, for pop, its generally fine for portable use. Ignore the noobs who claim there is a dramatic difference, they’re usually full of it.

@jk98 wrote:

Imo 128kbps sounds bad, while 192 kbps sounds good but like it is missing something.

What is it missing?  JK98, please ABX at –V2—c. 190 kbps–with LAME 3.99 and report back to us.

While were on this topic:

  1. Does sample rate have any effect on processor usage? I have a podcast that’s 64 kbps but 48000Hz, seems like a waste. I downscale them to 32000Hz to supposedly use less processor. Am I wasting my time doing that?

  2. Is there any difference on processor usage between MPEG-1, MPEG-2, and MPEG-2.5 (all Layer III) mp3 files? I would think that MPEG-1 would be the simplest.

@jk98 wrote:

If you can’t hear the difference between 128kbps and 192kbps, then perhaps you might benefit from better earphones?

I am not an audiophille, but use ZAGGsmartbuds and Skullcandy 50/50 which both are of a good quality.