Posted by Sporko
Is there ?
it would be great for P800, i dont need top class audio anyway !
Posted by WoeDee
Hmmm......Arent MP3's already compressed in comparison to WAV?
Posted by sos
There's a program called diet mp3 that compresses it further i think.
Posted by masseur
I use WMA (microsoft Windows Media Audio) 64kbit files instead of 129kbit file MP3. I find, especially on devices like ipaq when listened to through headphones, that the quality is about the same but they take up much less space.
Now... if only P800 could play WMA!
Posted by anas
Well, I compress MP3s to 64Kbps Mono, The sound quality is super, There is a small difference between it and the original track, But you save much space, and the speaker of the P800 is perfect in playing such files.
Posted by WoeDee
| Quote: |
|
anas,
Which program do you use to reduce the kbps in mp3's?
Posted by ferrarista44
i use Cool Edit to drop the bitrate from 192kbps to 40kbps, 22050Hz, stereo. file size ranges from 800kB-1.6MB from what used to be 3MB-5MB.
it's not compression.
you dont really need a high fidelity sound, coz you're only playing it from the earphone or from the loudspeaker. as long as it's 22050Hz, stereo, the sound is as good whether the bitrate is at 40kbps or 192kbps (that is at those kinds of outputs, i.e. earphones). if you go 11025Hz, i notice that the audio starts to garble and there is a very noticeable distortion present.
so for me, the smallest-sized mp3 is of 40kbps, 22050Hz, stereo.
[ This Message was edited by: ferrarista44 on 2003-02-07 23:24 ]
Posted by WoeDee
thanks ferrarista44!
BTW: Having fun navigating the forum on your P800? Howardforums has just launched a site optimized for wap! Check it out at http://www.howardforums.com/wap/
Posted by arnoldc
and in addition, if you happen to have the HPM-10 MP3 player from Ericsson, it came with a licensed MusicMatch that allows you to change bitrates. but i concur with ferrarista, 22kHz is the absolute minimum for me.
[ This Message was edited by: arnoldc on 2003-02-08 00:56 ]
Posted by CrazyStud17
Hey guys,
Use Diet Mp3 and a crack. Here's the site where you can get the crack
http://www.dr-high.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Files/DietMP3crack.exe
Ron
Posted by terrible
l use Nero Wave Editor. It has mp3pro (a new compression technology that can compress a WAV file to 1/2 the size of mp3 at almost the same quality. You can even load an mp3 and compress it further using mp3pro. The ones l compressed @ 64kbps using mp3pro are comparable to ones l compress @ 160kbps using mp3.
Posted by DmX
| Quote: |
|
and from where can we get this?
Posted by ejcottier
I use Audacity to compress mp3 files. Or convert from other formats into mp3. Audacity reads just about anything!
for windows users:
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/download/windows
or for linux users:
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/download/linux
you download it in source code but if you use ubuntu you can get it off your repository. "sudo apt-get install audacity"
or mac users:
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/download/mac
Make sure you also install the LAME MP3 Encoder which is available on the site.
Hope that works for you.
Posted by max_wedge
On 2003-02-07 23:16:00, anas wrote:
Well, I compress MP3s to 64Kbps Mono, The sound quality is super, There is a small difference between it and the original track, But you save much space, and the speaker of the P800 is perfect in playing such files.
to each their own, but mono? Is that really necessary? You lose so much depth that way, I wouldn't recommend it myself.
AAC does a good job at smaller bitrates than MP3. For example the quality of a 96Kbps track in AAC sounds about the same as a 128Kbps track in mp3
Posted by HPkuK610i
I use Winamp v.5.541 pro to convert my Mp3's to 64kbps m4a format.
Posted by Nixxi
Yep. Musicmatch. But dont overdo it. Because when bitrate is lowered, sound quality is lessened. An mp3 with 128kbps is the minimum i can go.
Posted by max_wedge
exactly. The more I listen to higher bitrates, the more crap lower ones sound. I'm up to 192Kbps AAC or 256Kbps mp3 BARE MINIMUM so far. I prefer 320 if possible.
Posted by crossmatched
Mp3 is already a compressed, lossy format. The acceptable near-cd quality is 128kbps.
Compressing mp3 further will result to an inferior quality sounding track file. So it would boil down to quantity vs quality issue:
more mp3s of lesser quality or lesser mp3s of more quality?
The only format that sounds good even at 64kbps is Sony's proprietary ATRAC format. Too bad it didn't get that popular like mp3 did.
Imo Sony could have pushed up the popularity of ATRAC had it allowed SE to include ATRAC as a supported format by the earth's 1st walkman phone, W800.
Posted by max_wedge
I doubt it. They removed the DRM restrictions too late in the game.
Posted by yea g
well I do use ATRAC on my psp, but I don't think my phone supports it
Posted by max_wedge
No the phones never supported ATRAC. (Other than the Japanese market)
Even the latest Sony Walkman players don't support ATRAC anymore.
Sony have dropped the codec more or less.
Posted by StevenC
I have keen hearing and my hobby is working with sounds. From my experiences, compressing a high-bitrate (> 172kbps) mp3 to 96kbps with the latest Lame MP3 Encoder v3.98.2 is the best compromise between size and sound quality.
96kbps is very good for classical and pop music in fact. You would hear few artifacts if you pay attention to. But for electronic/techno, 112kpbs is more acceptable.
Posted by groovepeppy
I believe what you really mean is mp3pro with 96kbps, well it will sound like common 96kbps mp3 if we put it on the phond cause i've never heard any phone that support mp3pro...
You will only hear it sounds good if you play it on a player with mp3pro support...
Posted by max_wedge
On 2008-10-26 16:30:34, StevenC wrote:
I have keen hearing and my hobby is working with sounds. From my experiences, compressing a high-bitrate (> 172kbps) mp3 to 96kbps with the latest Lame MP3 Encoder v3.98.2 is the best compromise between size and sound quality.
96kbps is very good for classical and pop music in fact. You would hear few artifacts if you pay attention to. But for electronic/techno, 112kpbs is more acceptable.
as groovepeppy said, mp3pro doesn't work on most cellphones. You get normal mp3 fallback.
But even if you could get mp3pro at 96Kbps, as you say it's equivalent to 172Kbps. Personally I find 256Kbps a bare minimum for my own listening pleasure (and my hearing is good but not fantastic by any means).
There is an assumption made by some (I used to think this myself) that a relatively low quality audio device such as a phone or mp3 player is too poor to reveal any improvement in higher bitrates compared to standard rates such as 128 mp3, 96 mp3pro/aac etc.
However my testing has revealed the opposite. I find that it is MORE important on a low quality device to use a high bitrate high quality codec. I guess it's like this: low quality x low quality = very low quality. Whereas: low quality x high quality = not quite so low quality.
Since using 256 and 320Kbps where possible on my mp3 players and phones I find the music much more pleasant and more full than when I used to use 96-128Kbps AAC or 128-192Kbps mp3
Posted by StevenC
On 2008-10-27 01:27:32, groovepeppy wrote:
I believe what you really mean is mp3pro with 96kbps, well it will sound like common 96kbps mp3 if we put it on the phond cause i've never heard any phone that support mp3pro...
You will only hear it sounds good if you play it on a player with mp3pro support...
No it's not mp3pro. That one is really no good.
Posted by Nixxi
Yup. I agree. I'm into the string quartet recordings and most of them are at 320kbs. Compressing them to even 172 would be like listening to garbage. I dont have keen hearing but the low quality is discernible.
Posted by groovepeppy
For audiophile ears i recommend using at least 256 kbps for your song collections, and use the compressed mp3 only for your ringtones
Posted by lukechris
Most
's (not all though) can't really cope with the high bitrate's ruch as the ones we get on a CD (320). I reccomending compressing no less than 100 so that the sound quality doesn't decrease at all to the ear but the size decreases to the phone
Posted by miguel82
Convert .mp3 to .ogg and use oggplayer to listen them. You can get the same audio quality for about half size. When i had p800 and the maximum memory you can get is 128mb this is the best choice. And for what i remember oggplayer is a uiq freeware app plus is nicer than the built in audio player of p800. You can store a lot of tracks on a 128mb card;)
Posted by lukechris
OggPlayer
That must be awkward when you want to listen to a song.
Go open an application, then browse for song.
Plus it will drain battery.
Compress MP3's I say
Posted by groovepeppy
On 2008-11-02 11:52:35, lukechris wrote:
Compressed MP3's I say
I'm on your back . . .
Posted by max_wedge
On 2008-11-01 22:22:37, lukechris wrote:
Most
's (not all though) can't really cope with the high bitrate's ruch as the ones we get on a CD (320). I reccomending compressing no less than 100 so that the sound quality doesn't decrease at all to the ear but the size decreases to the phone
My K750, K800 and W910 all play 320Kbps without any problems whatsoever.
BTW, you don't get 320Kbps on CD. The actual bitrate of CD Audio is 1411Kbps. Though MP3 is limited to 320Kbps, maybe that's what you mean.