Related
I listened to my sisters ipod a couple days ago and realized that I was missing out on good quality music. So I purchased a Zune. I use skullcandy headphones. I compared the sound of the same tracks on my Xperia and on the Zune and the sound from my Zune rocked.
Hence my poll. How many of you carry an alternate media player, ipod, zune iriver etc and have an Xperia?
I do, I carry my xperia for phone calls, text messages and internet and my creative zen V plus just for the music
i carry my walkman player.. sony walkman nwz-a728
Funny this post came up, now that its warmer and i'm not using my jacket to store my x1. I just literally started to charge and load up my zen vision m with my music for listening. Ill probably buy a hip case thingy for my xperia or just stash it in my bag.
ummm.... am i the only one wondering why everyone bought a pda if your just gonna use it for phone/internet? THEN getting an ipod for music? this seems totally ridiculous to me, the X1 is a big enough device without having an extra mp3 player in your pocket! may as well just carry an old nokia 3210 with your ipod for music, digital camera for photos, and laptop for internet
In my opinion my X1 sounds with good earphones like my Sennheiser CX500 or my Creative EP633 even better than every iPod with the same earphones. last year I bought a Creative ZEN and I just gave it back because my W960i sounded better. Even if the Xperia doesn't sound 100% as good as my W960i, it still sounds too good for me to take some other device with me...
SamAsQ said:
ummm.... am i the only one wondering why everyone bought a pda if your just gonna use it for phone/internet? THEN getting an ipod for music? this seems totally ridiculous to me, the X1 is a big enough device without having an extra mp3 player in your pocket! may as well just carry an old nokia 3210 with your ipod for music, digital camera for photos, and laptop for internet
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From a logical point of view your comment is valid. However sometimes life is not black and white. Windows Mobile devices have been able to play music from day 1 aka PPC2000. However, if sound quality or media player functionality is not a concern or issue for you then definitely play your jams with the X1 or any other windows mobile device.
However you've got to realize that PMP are specialized and offer more than just playing music with shuffle and repeat functions.
I thought I'd just list some reasons why I like using my Zune 120 over my X1 for music.
- Space: I have a large music library
- Battery life: I commute an average of 4 hours everyday
- Sound quality:It's not all about headphones; the device has to produce the frequencies
- Bit rate :X1 cannot play lossless 320kb audio
- Screen size :This is trivial but I like the big screen
- Sync speed : Even though the X! is USB 2.0 capable you have to switch it to USB mode else it take forever to sync files. I had a 16GB sdhc card
- Seamless : The Zune just works. It's seamless and doesnt get bogged down. I can even sync it wirelessly and has tons of features.
Mind you, a lot of the reasons I listed can be recreated directly or with 3rd party apps on most WinMo devices ie sound improvement with SRS WOW HD or Conduits pocket player for more functions but my point is that my Zune just works. It does what it does best without any hacks or 3rd party purchases or freeware.
Now I'm not trying to sellup my Zune because I'm sure the same goes for an ipod or Iriver or Creative device. Until MS integrates such seamless functionality into WinMo device PMPs will do the job.
No longer since I have the X1. Battery life is still okay. I charge every night and listen to music about 6 to 8 hours a day. But now I might consider switching back to carrying a MP3 Player because I bought Sennheiser MX W1 wireless (in-ear) headphones and it might be that the Kleer Wireless Audio @ 2.4 Ghz interferes with WCDMA @ 2.1 Ghz. At least the signal is interrupted quite often compared to bluetooth connections, also over short distances < 1m "through" a human being. I will definitely experiment with that. Sound quality is awesome.
Firefall! said:
No longer since I have the X1. Battery life is still okay. I charge every night and listen to music about 6 to 8 hours a day. But now I might consider switching back to carrying a MP3 Player because I bought Sennheiser MX W1 wireless (in-ear) headphones and it might be that the Kleer Wireless Audio @ 2.4 Ghz interferes with WCDMA @ 2.1 Ghz. At least the signal is interrupted quite often compared to bluetooth connections, also over short distances < 1m "through" a human being. I will definitely experiment with that. Sound quality is awesome.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Music quality on new generations of MP3 Players, Phones, and Computers is just a placebo effect. Music quality is a "lie". What determines music quality = head phones or speakers. What mp3 player you use is just plain old placebo BS.
I mean seriously people have done tests in which you see listeners who listen to high fidelity and low fidelity and they couldn't find any difference. This includes music producers and artists, and even the producers who claim th be able to tell the difference between a .wav and a .mp3 is straight up BS.
We humans can only hear a certain amount of frequencies.
poetryrocksalot said:
Music quality on new generations of MP3 Players, Phones, and Computers is just a placebo effect. Music quality is a "lie". What determines music quality = head phones or speakers. What mp3 player you use is just plain old placebo BS.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL! You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. However that's ok! The media is crucial when it comes to sound quality. You can have the best and most expensive media player but if the media player cant output the frequency nor process at the bit rate then you are screwed.
Windows Media Mobile cannot process lossless audio. The difference in disparity between media encoded in 192VBR/F and 320KB /f is ridiculously clear regardless of headphones.
Please utilize the internet before quoting "false" facts. Nice try though.
Sony NWZ A818 is my music player.
I carry y Xperia for messages, telephone etc,
and my iphone for music.
i hate it to use the xperia for music with the headset, because i cannot skip the music with the headset, just like with the iphone
ash969 said:
I carry y Xperia for messages, telephone etc,
and my iphone for music.
i hate it to use the xperia for music with the headset, because i cannot skip the music with the headset, just like with the iphone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's pretty unique
I use my X1 for phone internet and videos and music/podcasts but also have a Meizu M6sl... pretty much because I had that before I got my loverly X1... I still use both though...
poetryrocksalot said:
Music quality on new generations of MP3 Players, Phones, and Computers is just a placebo effect. Music quality is a "lie". What determines music quality = head phones or speakers. What mp3 player you use is just plain old placebo BS.
I mean seriously people have done tests in which you see listeners who listen to high fidelity and low fidelity and they couldn't find any difference. This includes music producers and artists, and even the producers who claim th be able to tell the difference between a .wav and a .mp3 is straight up BS.
We humans can only hear a certain amount of frequencies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BS
Everything factors into sound quality from your headphones, the bitrate, the quality of the MP3 conversion software, to the amplifiers in the listening device. The chain is only as good as the weakest link.
On cheap equipment (most consumer stuff), it is hard to tell the difference between a good .mp3 and a .wav. On professional equipment, the difference is night and day. A professional sound engineer/mixer can probably tell the difference even on cheap equipment.
So there probably is a difference in the sound circuitry of a standalone media player as opposed to a do-it-all smartphone.
poetryrocksalot said:
Music quality on new generations of MP3 Players, Phones, and Computers is just a placebo effect. Music quality is a "lie". What determines music quality = head phones or speakers. What mp3 player you use is just plain old placebo BS.
I mean seriously people have done tests in which you see listeners who listen to high fidelity and low fidelity and they couldn't find any difference. This includes music producers and artists, and even the producers who claim th be able to tell the difference between a .wav and a .mp3 is straight up BS.
We humans can only hear a certain amount of frequencies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends. Arguably an audiophile would argue that a portable source in general is compromised when compared to a home source as the former doesn't have the space for a proper amp output stage. Though I get what you're saying.
Moreover the nature of the amplifier used in the output stage of the digital audio player can have adverse or preferable effects on the final sound (I hesitate to say "sound quality" as this is more of a "sound signature"). Hence why some players might sound comparatively warm and mellow, with rounded-out midrange and toned-down treble (my old Cowon iAudio X5, Meizu M6 MiniPlayer SP, and Nokia N86, for example). Conversely, other players might sound a bit colder, trading a rich midrange for some more emphasized treble. And of course there is always the sterile ground of neutrality that some may prefer (I think my iPod Video 5.5G 80GB fell under here).
I can't quite figure out where the sound signature of the X1 belongs. It doesn't sound like it offers as much body compared to the N86, but its bass is around the same level. Regardless, I believe the sound signature of the Zune is what the OP might prefer. Although all modern players are capable of reproducing the full audible spectrum audibly, many reproduce them in subtly different ways.
Plus there are externalities such as hiss, which is prevalent on my X1 (and on my M6 SP, but less so) but wasn't a concern on my N86 or X5 or iPod.
But the components between a high-end smartphone and a dedicated portable media player are negligibly different. Due to the size of their components and the compromises that are made for that portability, they are both in the same range of circuit quality. You'd have to get something like a $500 Kenwood Japanese import MP3 player to get an amp output stage that is noticeably superior, and even that difference is arguable.
I've read much speculation on the head-fi forums (admittedly before the "Sound Science" forum was created) and most people there concluded that for all but perhaps two or three portable media players (the Kenwoods I mentioned above), 192kbps MP3 is virtually lossless. On the home front it was generally believed that 320kbps performs the same effect, being indistinguishable from FLAC, ALAC, WAV, WMA-L, et al. As your bitrate strays down from these values in the respective setups, you (depending on your level of hearing) are prone to hearing more compression artifacts.
Then there were a few that claimed they could hear stark differences. These few were the kinds that invested upwards of ten thousand U.S. dollars on audio cables. I'd like to scream "snake oil" but I can't, as I haven't tried such extravagant setups myself.
I used to care a lot about this, and spent so much time debating on sound quality that I forgot what was really important: the music. I sold all my MP3 players, stuck to the X1 and my Sennheiser HD25-1s, and I couldn't be happier for it. Much better to appreciate what's great than to worry about what little is wrong and could be improved.
alabij said:
LOL! You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. However that's ok! The media is crucial when it comes to sound quality. You can have the best and most expensive media player but if the media player cant output the frequency nor process at the bit rate then you are screwed.
Windows Media Mobile cannot process lossless audio. The difference in disparity between media encoded in 192VBR/F and 320KB /f is ridiculously clear regardless of headphones.
Please utilize the internet before quoting "false" facts. Nice try though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According the the wikipedia page WMA lossless does play on windows media player mobile http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Media_Audio#Windows_Media_Audio_Lossless
I just downloaded a sample file and it played on my xperia - or am I missing something? Arn't there 3rd party players that will play FLAC and other formats too?
Personally I think the media and headphones matter the most, whats in between makes little difference to all but self confessed audiophiles who will claim that using gold plated oxygen free cable makes a difference too. (ie BS)
scote said:
According the the wikipedia page WMA lossless does play on windows media player mobile http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Media_Audio#Windows_Media_Audio_Lossless
I just downloaded a sample file and it played on my xperia - or am I missing something? (ie BS)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm . . . You've got me there. I wish you would post a link to this sample file. Last I checked WMP Mobile 10 could not and does not support WMA 320Kb/s F Lossless. Mind you this is not the same as .wav which is supported by the hardware though playing/loading a full song 03 3 mins r above in .wav might take a min or two and probably freeze your device.
???? 320kbps != lossless.
Lossless = FLAC, ALAC, APE, WMA-L, WAV, et al.
WAV is generally 1411kbps, the rest are inherently VBR as there is a variable amount of lossless information in a track per time. I think FLAC is around ~700 ABR for most of my tracks.
Regardless, 320kbps and lossless are transparent to most people (regardless of setup) anyway so it doesn't really matter. Lossless arguably doesn't benefit portable sources, which are generally transparent to 192kbps.
Also I am unsure that WAV would freeze a device, especially if it is in solid-state memory. In hard disks it generally requires a lot of seeking and consequent power consumption, but hard disk players are phasing out anyway. The point is that WAV requires no decompression as it isn't compressed at all, and therefore uses the least processing power. WAV is less taxing on non-hard drive portable media players than even MP3s.
As far as I remember in some Magic custom ROM at least FLAC got a support.
It's be great, esplecially with FLAC which is lossless.
Well, I am missing this, too, so I am looking into building a FlacPlayer and had very little success so far. However, I am blaming it on the fact that I have plenty of "real work" to do, so I don't really have time to study the FLAC-code in detail.
I'll keep you updated if I make any progress.
I love flac, but I also love free space. With flac taking 30mb per song. Ouch is needed. but again i know its lossless but you really need decent headphones to notice.
Danie1 said:
Well, I am missing this, too, so I am looking into building a FlacPlayer and had very little success so far. However, I am blaming it on the fact that I have plenty of "real work" to do, so I don't really have time to study the FLAC-code in detail.
I'll keep you updated if I make any progress.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excuses....
OGG (audio) files already play fine (at least it does via the default HTC media player).
Why in hell would want flac on your mobile phone?
The DAC (Digital to Analog Converter) which handles the conversion to analog signal in the headphone jack is very compact and will not take advantage of flac on a mobile phone. Not to mention You would require hifi headphones, the battery would drain A LOT faster and it would take a lot of space on SD card.
Four reasons:
1. FLAC is lossless.
2. FLAC is easier to decode than MP3 (and thus uses less CPU)
3. My earpieces are hifi.
4. Why not?
Uqbar said:
Four reasons:
1. FLAC is lossless.
2. FLAC is easier to decode than MP3 (and thus uses less CPU)
3. My earpieces are hifi.
4. Why not?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2. Probably not even true . FLAC can take a surprising big amount of CPU time to decode (edit: compared to MAD mp3 decoding) and uses a bit more RAM (if the FLAC's are encoded at >= q7 or q8). And playing back MP3 / AAC might even use (a bit) of hardware acceleration. Anyway you cut it, FLAC files are bigger, so it requires more read-actions from the SD card and that takes up more battery in the end.
3. Good for your earpieces. But the quality the phone can output over the 3,5mm jack is abysmal at best. Even worse, on my Hero I prefer to use my ultra cheap bass-heavy in-ear-headphones instead of my $130 Sure's because that cheap ones kinda mask the crappy quality. There is quite a lot of hiss and static noise on the output (Signal-to-noise ratio is to-pee-yourself-laughing-so-bad).
Any quality-gain the FLAC format would have, the phone is not able to output that through the headphone jack or USBext connector, so it's useless. Use a proper iriver or iAudio mp3 player for that kind of stuff .
4. The above 2 reasons.
And please remember that Android development at the moment is all Java based (I don't know if the NativeSDK is already useable or not). That means any kind of audio decoder has to be completely CPU based and has to be written in Java. Doesn't mean it can't be done (or isn't already done), but most libraries and implementations floating around aren't in Java so they would require porting. And porting lowlevel stuff to Java is simply something a lot of developers aren't happy doing.
Why flac support?
The answer for me is simple, I have all my CDs ripped as flac for use with my Squeezebox and iAudio S9. I don't like taking my S9 out with me when I'm going for a beer or two, which means the Hero is my choice music player in those situations. As there is no flac support on Android by default, I have had to convert my entire collection to mp3, I don't like having to have two copies of the same file, it annoys me.
Flac is supported in CyanogenMod ROM from version 3.9.3 onwards.
Florida.
dipje your 130 dollar Shures are not high end... It's spelled with an H by the way. High end would be westone labs or JH or Ultimate Ears. If this guy wants to listen to flac it's his choice. The truth of the matter is mp3 320 (the maximum you can go) cuts off EVERYTHING above 20,000. Whether you hear this or not is inconsequential because a: there is empty bandwith now and that means less dyanmics for the rest of the frequencies and b: there is a second selective bandpass filter employed by mp3 encoding that cuts all the way down to 16,000 and YOU DO hear those frequencies even on the MOST TERRIBLE OF TERRIBLE devices.
The size of the jack has very little to do with the quality of the output. 1/8" or full size 1/4" it does not matter. FLAC is BY FAR easier to decode than mp3 just like it is BY FAR easier to ENCODE than mp3. When I encode WAV to FLAC it is practically done as soon as I hit encode. Of course, you know how long mp3 takes I hope. You do rip and encode your own music right?
Anyway, I could prefer FLAC just because my battery would run longer.
The lossless and dynamics things would just add some more benefits, as well as the freedom that's in there.
By the way, FLAC can be (of course) written in Java: http://jflac.sourceforge.net/ but native code would allow my battery to run even longer.
nikonmikon said:
dipje your 130 dollar Shures are not high end... It's spelled with an H by the way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Didn't say they were high end. Trust me, I know better . And sue me for a spelling error, that's what you get with auto-correcting on-screen-keyboards .
nikonmikon said:
If this guy wants to listen to flac it's his choice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No denying that! Sorry if it sounded like it, but I _really_ don't mean to say something like "FLAC on a Hero is stupid, so stfu" or anything like it. Ofcourse, the choice is there for everybody.
I was just noting arguments what would be against FLAC on a device like the Hero. If anybody would say "I don't care about those points" then by all means, feel free .
nikonmikon said:
The truth of the matter is mp3 320 (the maximum you can go) cuts off EVERYTHING above 20,000. Whether you hear this or not is inconsequential because a: there is empty bandwith now and that means less dyanmics for the rest of the frequencies and b: there is a second selective bandpass filter employed by mp3 encoding that cuts all the way down to 16,000 and YOU DO hear those frequencies even on the MOST TERRIBLE OF TERRIBLE devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here you make a very good point, the basic lowpass filters applied with almost all MP3 encoders out there indeed destroy a lot of detail that even something like the crappy DAC in the Hero will miss.
nikonmikon said:
The size of the jack has very little to do with the quality of the output. 1/8" or full size 1/4" it does not matter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where did I say something like that??
The jack output indeed doesn't matter. But the fact is that the internal design of a small phone / device will have an impact on the shielding and interference on the audio signal. Dedicated audio devices / mp3 players are (hopefully) designed with this in mind, but on phones it can affect quality (much). On my old Diamond for example you hear ticking and a static noise appear suddenly on the line (quite high volume actually) the moment the GPS is activated. If there are more things like this that affect audio quality, I don't know. I think there are, and quite some of them are audible, specially by someone who prefers a format like FLAC. But I don't know this fore sure at all.
nikonmikon said:
FLAC is BY FAR easier to decode than mp3 just like it is BY FAR easier to ENCODE than mp3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You actually tried it? You know the reason why a lot of devices like Cowon iAudio devices only support FLAC's encoded with the quality parameter set to 7 or lower? Take any kind of software on a Windows Mobile (for example) device with a Qualcomm 72xx chipset, let it play a q8 or q9 FLAC file. Measure the complete system load while doing so. The device struggles. The I/O calls on an embedded platform like that make for a huge impact, making even normal FLAC files harder to decode than most MP3 files. Make it a q8/q9 file with 24bit and the CPU will struggle. The memory needed for decoding also increases very rapidly with q8/q9 files.
nikonmikon said:
When I encode WAV to FLAC it is practically done as soon as I hit encode. Of course, you know how long mp3 takes I hope.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It ofcourse all depends on your system configuration. But if you let LAME 3.98+ encode on with the default --vbr-new method, you now it doesn't take long _at all_. Ripping an entire CD from WAV to FLAC (or direct from CD with EAC or something similar) takes (still) less CPU than MP3 yes, but the disk activity of writing more data makes it pretty much the exact same speed as ripping to MP3. But now we're getting off topic, this was just to give you a little more insight on my thinking.
nikonmikon said:
You do rip and encode your own music right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let's not start any kind of flaming, ok? (Just as a precaution). Ofcourse I do. And I don't just state things I make up in my mind, I state them because I noticed those things myself, and maybe even researched it for my work.
Anyone make any progress about the equaliser app that we are missing on the HTC?
I dont know why we are wasting time talking about lossless audio crap when we can make any badly ripped mp3 sound good by tweeking the eaqualiser.
I heard HTC were going to make it available in the new ROM, but it aint there.
Whats the verdict?
dipje said:
"buncha stuffs said"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did not realize you were posting from a device with a limited keyboard.
It did seem like you were coming off as telling him to give it up but, I can see how you were bringing those points up to make sure he knew what he would be up against. It only takes one developer who is actually enthusiastic about FLAC though and those all fall away.
For the jack, I agree that the device has a relatively small footprint which makes isolating things difficult and traces undoubtedly get put next to one another that would never be true in such a case as a preamp or amplifier. Noise will certainly be introduced. I thought you said that the tiny jack would be terrible in sound quality. I was mistaken. Someone who does enjoy flac will hear these ticks and such but, they do not negate the higher frequencies gained by using FLAC over a lossy compression. It would be akin to some insane audiophile who prefers vinyl over digital on a $500,000 (or euro) stereo and simply ignores the pops and clicks that comes with vinyl. (This happens often in the audiophile world)
I am pretty sure Cowon devices support all the way to 8. I don't believe you can encode a "9" as 8 is the maximum. My girlfriend has a Cowon s9 that I bought for her so I know this to be true (about the 0-8 support). I believe the website also says this. However, it is likely that FLAC playback uses more power than mp3. I don't know to be honest. Accessing a card takes much power? I figured it wouldn't matter because it's not mechanical. The multiple IO actions happen all the time on the phone doesn't it?
Relatively speaking I was saying that FLAC encodes and decodes MUCH faster than mp3. Regardless of the system configuration unless it somehow had mp3 hardware encoding/decoding. The disk activity is not actually called by EAC if you recall EAC does not encode to anything. It merely rips wav from the disc in question.
I don't think I was flaming just considering you not knowledgeable in this area but you definitely proved me wrong
Oh also, I should state that the selective filter is adjustable with mp3 encoding but it defaults at 16khz.
Those noises appearing at low volume parts, especially when fading between tracks. Are they totally hardware related. And are they always appearing equally. Sometimes i think it's worse than others. And after i started using Meridian player. I don't have the funny skipping, that sometimes appeared at the beginning af a song, with the original player.
Hi,
I've just ordered myself a Nexus One to replace my iPhone 3G 16GB!
And as my mobile phone is also my number one portable music player, I will be playing a few songs on this thing!
My music library is mostly Apple Lossless (at least all the songs I've ripped myself is, and all others are 128kbps+ MP3) as my Sennheiser IE6 ear-buds are often limited by the source.. So MP3's tend to lack some quality in many scenarios, making me go lossless with all my CD's and as iPhone only support Apple Lossless and WAV(E) for lossless audio, I went for ALAC because WAV(E) is simply a no go for me..
Now I'm starting to prepare for my Nexus One, so I have my SanDisk Ultra Mobile 16GB MicroSD already and was thinking about arranging some music on it.. But then I figure Android 2.1 doesn't actually support any lossless codecs, besides WAV(E)?
There is no ALAC (Apple Lossless), nor any FLAC support?
This is rather disappointing, as I would expect it to support something besides WAV(E) as most mobile phones and portable players do, and no FLAC support on a open source operating system just seems odd to me?
Is there anyway to get lossless formats to work on the Nexus One, besides using WAV(E)? Or would I have to convert all my ALAC songs into WAV(E), taking up more space and supporting less features?
Haven't tried any lossless formats yet, but you might consider converting to hi-res .ogg (vorbis)... My CD collection is all .ogg, and I was delighted to discover that unlike iTunes/iPods, the Nexus/Android FULLY SUPPORTS them and DISPLAYS the .ogg ID3 tags. (The sound is great with my studio cans.) Like you, I am about to install a 16gb mini SD card and plan to use the Nexus as my player.
A custom ROM is the only way you are going to get support for the foreseeable future. Patches for FLAC have been submitted but not reviewed much less accepted into the release schedule. A shame really, there should be an easier way to add a codec.
I'll jump ship to Android when these bastards start shipping in HTC devices. I could have a full third of my FLAC library on my phone at any one time.
http://gizmodo.com/5565944/imagine-toshibas-128gb-nand-flash-memory-in-your-next-phone
flac= the ****.... however on a phone, there would not be a noticible difference because it would be played out of headphones or a small speaker.... when i synce music to my ipod i just auto convert flacs to 320 kbps.... on my home theatre system it saounds freakin incredible though lol
hibby50 said:
flac= the ****.... however on a phone, there would not be a noticible difference because it would be played out of headphones or a small speaker.... when i synce music to my ipod i just auto convert flacs to 320 kbps.... on my home theatre system it saounds freakin incredible though lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How many versions of your music library do you want to keep?
How crappy are your headphones?
I use Meridian which supports FLAC, but it still skips on my Hero. Kernel support doesn't have this problem, and it CAN be baked in to a custom kernel... Usage is slightly lower than OGG or M4a... I also use UE SuperFi 5 pro IEM's, and let me tell you - the difference can audible. I can hear the noise scatter caused by interacting with the touch-screen (which was *really* bad on the OC kernel ) A lot depends on the type of music, too.
That said. 128GB still is short of my collection, so... why carry it all at once? It'll be fun to have that much storage on the phone still.
cjdalessio said:
How many versions of your music library do you want to keep?
How crappy are your headphones?
I use Meridian which supports FLAC, but it still skips on my Hero. Kernel support doesn't have this problem, and it CAN be baked in to a custom kernel... Usage is slightly lower than OGG or M4a... I also use UE SuperFi 5 pro IEM's, and let me tell you - the difference can audible. I can hear the noise scatter caused by interacting with the touch-screen (which was *really* bad on the OC kernel ) A lot depends on the type of music, too.
That said. 128GB still is short of my collection, so... why carry it all at once? It'll be fun to have that much storage on the phone still.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol i have skullcandy full metal jackets and I use media monkey to manage and sync and foobar to play. media monkey converts them while syncing so i dont have to keep multiple collections. i do need better headphones though...
Keep in mind that higher bit rate music file also require more CPU processing to play them. If you are playing a lot of music, you'll find that your battery life will be much better with lower bit rate files.
I'm building a small home media server, instead of buying a prepackaged solution, I prefer the challenge and reward. But I'm having a hell of a time getting the encoding of video down. I can encode most videos in my library in about 45 minutes each, to what ever format I want but I can't figure out the best format to use.
I'd prefer to stick with an open format, theroa or webm, but neither of those seem to work across all of my mobile devices.
Supposedly gingerbread allowed webm to work, but that doesn't seem to be the case on my epic, and the xooms honey comb doesn't appear to support it. Way to go Google for supporting your own container format.
Anyone have any luck with any particular formats? Streaming wise?
I'd hate to go h264 because I prefer to support everything open, and I really won't be using HD because most of my stuff is ripped off of DVD not bluray and I don't necisarily want to eat up the bandwidth over 3g when I'm not streaming from home. Especially if my ISP takes notice that I'm running so much up stream traffic, and find out I do have a webserver running.
Sent from my Xoom using XDA Premium App
Also I shouldnmention I prefer to stay away from having to use flash, an html5 video tag is what I am aiming for.
Just a question, what media server software are you running?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
Well, depending on the type of server structure and video player that you are using to give your videos playback. If you add some sort of support for DivX's web-based player, you may be able to let users (off their computers) stream pure MKV files. That would save you a lot of space as it is a container similar to WebM and Theora only much more efficient.
However, if you need something simple, you could always go the alternative of H.264, X.264 is an even more compressed .mp4 file that retains a very clean output for quality trade-off. Spend some time here:
1. http://www.doom9.org/index.html?/gknot-main6.htm
2. http://mewiki.project357.com/wiki/X264_Settings
These are small guides, but they are a step in the right direction.
Do some research and see where you can get. When you refine the trick to encoding in this format you can be looking at proper encodes at nearly <2mb/minute. With something that isn't "HD" you'll be able to easily get a clean (or at least acceptable) encode with bitrates well below 1,000 kbps.
squshy 7 said:
Just a question, what media server software are you running?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just an ngenix static fil server and an iis webserver
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App
Pettro said:
Well, depending on the type of server structure and video player that you are using to give your videos playback. If you add some sort of support for DivX's web-based player, you may be able to let users (off their computers) stream pure MKV files. That would save you a lot of space as it is a container similar to WebM and Theora only much more efficient.
However, if you need something simple, you could always go the alternative of H.264, X.264 is an even more compressed .mp4 file that retains a very clean output for quality trade-off. Spend some time here:
1. http://www.doom9.org/index.html?/gknot-main6.htm
2. http://mewiki.project357.com/wiki/X264_Settings
These are small guides, but they are a step in the right direction.
Do some research and see where you can get. When you refine the trick to encoding in this format you can be looking at proper encodes at nearly <2mb/minute. With something that isn't "HD" you'll be able to easily get a clean (or at least acceptable) encode with bitrates well below 1,000 kbps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the links. For the time being I've oped to encode h264/mp4. I was really hoping for webm, but it looks as though I don't have much of an option. Forcing my self to stay confined to a plain html5 video tag has proved limiting, low over head, but limiting.
Media is encoding now, it'll be a day or three or four before its all done, but so far as proved worth while. Though I have found I may need a bit more horse power to service multiple streams on the iis server.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA Premium App