Gone back to CBR Options

[shadowking]

Well I've had it sort of. Everything these days is too complex. My sansa M250 wont handle vbr mp3 well -stutering / volume issues. I really like this player so im keeping it.

I did some abx tests with recent and lame 3.90. CBR 192 is the minimum acceptable and 224 yields very decent quality on par with V2 ~ V0..
The old encoders (before presets) are very fast too. I settled for -h -b 224

I don't want to keep up with the latest and greatest anymore. VBR , joint stereo .. no more. Just an old version of EAC and lame because it just works.

[saratoga]

Well I've had it sort of. Everything these days is too complex. My sansa M250 wont handle vbr mp3 well -stutering / volume issues. I really like this player so im keeping it.

Which m250 version do you have?

[shadowking]

Well I've had it sort of. Everything these days is too complex. My sansa M250 wont handle vbr mp3 well -stutering / volume issues. I really like this player so im keeping it.

Which m250 version do you have?

v2.0

[saratoga]

Well I've had it sort of. Everything these days is too complex. My sansa M250 wont handle vbr mp3 well -stutering / volume issues. I really like this player so im keeping it.

Which m250 version do you have?

v2.0

ah ok, can't help you there.

[shadowking]

My mistake 2.0 is for 2 GB. I had a detailed look: V4.1. 08A

This post has been edited by shadowking: Dec 30 2011, 07:43

[halb27]

Strange that VBR doesn't work with the sansa m250. Everything's fine with my sansa clip+.
Anyway, from former listening tests my result (with 3.90.3) was also: CBR 224 is very good; even hard problem samples become very acceptable. At that time using gpsycho was my favorite too, but today I probably wouldn't give away the benefits of joint stereo when using CBR/ABR though at high bitrate it isn't that important. Just like you, if I'd use CBR or ABR I'd do some listening tests, but if in doubt I'd also go for an older version like 3.90. CBR was much more popular then, that is it was better tested, and I expect no significant Lame development for CBR/ABR since the days of Lame 3.93.

This post has been edited by halb27: Dec 30 2011, 10:07

[edwardar]

I still use my sansa M260 sometimes, and it's always worked well with Lame vbr files (I usually use V5). Mine is V2.2.5A.

These are great little players (especially for people who like standard rechargeable batteries!) - if only Rockbox had been ported (a preliminary version was made for V4 only).

The only problem I have is that every 100th file is missed by the internal database. My solution is to use playlists for each album, so I never miss a track.

[shadowking]

Strange that VBR doesn't work with the sansa m250. Everything's fine with my sansa clip+.
Anyway, from former listening tests my result (with 3.90.3) was also: CBR 224 is very good; even hard problem samples become very acceptable. At that time using gpsycho was my favorite too, but today I probably wouldn't give away the benefits of joint stereo when using CBR/ABR though at high bitrate it isn't that important. Just like you, if I'd use CBR or ABR I'd do some listening tests, but if in doubt I'd also go for an older version like 3.90. CBR was much more popular then, that is it was better tested, and I expect no significant Lame development for CBR/ABR since the days of Lame 3.93.

Thanks for your input. My quality tests involved gpsycho so i went with those older encoders (3.90.3)

[saratoga]

My mistake 2.0 is for 2 GB. I had a detailed look: V4.1. 08A

You could try rockbox on it. The main problem is that we don't setup some voltage regulator quite right, so if you turn up the volume too high the player thinks the battery is dead and shuts off.

[Andavari]

What sort of tag versions and other possible tag formats do your MP3's have that give you problems when using VBR mode?

This will undoubtedly seem like an ancient test, however nonetheless you could try some MP3's that only have an ID3v1 tag in them.

[slks]

Apologies for being a bit off-topic, but I'm finding it amusing that you-all "really like" these players and think that they are "great little players", when they do not play VBR files, fail to index every 100th file, and shut off if the volume is too high.

The word I'd use to describe such a player would be more like "broken".

This post has been edited by slks: Dec 31 2011, 15:29

[Soap]

The word I'd use to describe such a player would be more like "broken".

Don't lump Sandisk firmware problems in with Rockbox firmware problems.

[saratoga]

Strange that VBR doesn't work with the sansa m250. Everything's fine with my sansa clip+.
Anyway, from former listening tests my result (with 3.90.3) was also: CBR 224 is very good; even hard problem samples become very acceptable. At that time using gpsycho was my favorite too, but today I probably wouldn't give away the benefits of joint stereo when using CBR/ABR though at high bitrate it isn't that important. Just like you, if I'd use CBR or ABR I'd do some listening tests, but if in doubt I'd also go for an older version like 3.90. CBR was much more popular then, that is it was better tested, and I expect no significant Lame development for CBR/ABR since the days of Lame 3.93.

Thanks for your input. My quality tests involved gpsycho so i went with those older encoders (3.90.3)

Did you end up figuring this out? If not, I might be willing to trade you for a newer, rockbox capable Sansa player. That way i could look into the m200v4 port.