I don't know why, but it seems every mpc file I come across always sounds better than an MP3 file of comparable quality. Really, I had a 192 kbps MP3 copy of a song and then recieved a 233 kbps MPC copy of the same song today from a friend for comparison, and he is right, this quality is unbelievable. There is a level of depth and punch here that goes way beyond the difference of 41 kbps. I cannot believe how much better this file sounds. Am I just nuts? I am seriously considering switching my whole collection over to MPC because of this stark difference. However, there are considerations:

Is mpc widely compatible? I read the guide here on ripping with EAC and it is quite easy to comprehend, but I am wondering if SonicStage, the program I use to transfer files to my MZ-S1 minidisc player, will be able to decode these files.

Any info greatly appreciated. I know this topic has been beaten to death, but this is a major potential overhaul we're talking about here.

unfortunatly mpc has very little support. Write the makers of your portable hardware and let them know how much you want mpc support. Yes, mpc actually does sound much better then mp3. Also, mpc would use less battery power on a portable player

Doesn't matter much in his case. The Sony will transcode everything into the ATRAC3 format anyway. So for MPC, you'd just decode to WAV first and then feed that to your transfer program.

Yes, MPC produces files of great quality and has the least problem cases, but to be fair, that drastic differences you hear might also stem from other factors, such as different sources of the same song, or that your friend used a bad quality MP3 encoder. I mean, you're certainly making no mistake quality-wise if you start ripping to MPC now, but don't expect miracles, it either sounds transparent (no audible difference to the source) or not (which is rare with MPC ).

I know that Rockbox shows interest and i *cough* heard it through the grapevine that something is going on with the Neuros soon.

A quick answer to one of your questions, Sonicstage does not decode/transcode mpc into ATRAC for your Minidisc player.

The easiest way to get around this if you still wish to consider mpc, is to use foobar to set up your playlist, then dump the tracks to your hard disk as wavs with the track titles as file names and a track number so the play order is messed up (again using foobar), then import these wavs into Sonicstage and transfer them to your player. (They will go across with titles, and what ever other info you include in the file names).

Then you can delete the wavs off your hard drive.

Works well enough, but you need a s**tload of hard disk space if you are doing this with a Hi-MD, and wish to transfer like 16 hours worth of tunes.

Hope this helps.

Dennis.

The new Sony audio player models (including minidisc) coming in April will be able to directly playback MP3 files:
SonicStage 3.0 coming soon
Currently you don't need SonicStage to transfer mp3 files for the models NW-E75/85/99.

Therefore you will be able to transcode mpc into mp3 and play them on your player with minimum inconvenience.

I am waiting eagerly for NW-E505 myself.

That step is coming much too late. They slept away the day holding on to their beloved ATRAC and let others take over the whole huge MP3 portable market.

Understood, I guess maybe I will send Sony an e-mail to suggest they include a decoder for the next SonicStage.

Now, about the quality issue: I currently use 320 kbps LAME-encoded MP3's on --alt preset insane. Really, this is just about as transparent as LAME gets and it uses massive disk space but I don't care since I have a 160 gig drive to store my music on. Now, would I expirience better quality when switching to mpc? I have compared quite a few mpc files to MP3 files and the MPC's have always sounded better, but I have never had the opportunity to compare an MPC file with one of my LAME-encoded 320 kbps files. What are your thoughts on this matter?

I think people at HA would be hestitant to give you an answer at this point. Although you claim MPC files sound better, you should back up your claims with ABX test. Especially if you're talking about bitrates far beyond transparency levels such as 320kbps, probably no one could ABX such samples from the originals except when the sample is problematic/exception.

Lossy codecs has one goal: to reach transparency as efficiently as possible, i.e. use as small bits as possible and create a file that is indistinguishable from the original based on blind hearing tests. In this sense 320kbps is an overkill and VBR will do a better allocation of bits whenever necessary. Also if you're aiming for transparency then it is pretty much agreed that MPC at standard quality is transparent and uses a lower bitrate than MP3 --alt-preset standard. Also the lowpass filter MPC uses cuts at a higher threshold than LAME does, thus I personally believe MPC files are closer to the original. Yet speaking only in terms of hearing (not mathematically) both should be indistinguishable from the original.

MPC --quality 5 (VBR, around 170 kbps average) can outperform LAME --alt-preset insane on test samples, simply because of insufficiencies in the MP3 format. MP3 in it's current form exists since 1994. It was designed by Fraunhofer before that time to deliver good audio quality at ISDN rate (64 / 128 kbps), and not to be perfectly transparent (even though it was later often advertized as such). Already in 1997, they standardized the designated successor format called AAC, which they hoped would very soon replace MP3. But at the same time they were overtook by the market realities when MP3 spread like a wildfire on the internet, leading to Napster in 1999. Because of those quality insufficiencies (that could then be reduced with LAME), MPC was developed, to have a lossy codec that delivers transparency under almost any circumstance, and is built from the ground up for that purpose (give or take some necessary alternative methods because of existing patents that would've been violated otherwise).

In the end, you save quite some space and gain a bit quality (doesn't necessarily mean audibly, like i said before, but it surely won't sound worse either) by using MPC. You lose the main point of MP3, which is that it works on so many devices. But if your personal situation allows the switch to MPC without much inconvenience, it's really not a bad thing to do.

Interesting, I think I'll go for it on a couple of my CD's and try A/Bing them.

I have noticed that the 1.15 versions tend to average rather at 180-185 kbps for standard; around 10% more than the 1.14 beta. Since standard has always been transparent for me, this consistent bitrate increase is my only gripe about using the more recent versions for my standard listening encodes, for which I look for the best quality/size ratio (contrary to my archivals, for which I use --insane and the latest version).

Man... you've been around since November 2003. Come on !

What's that supposed to mean? Can I get an answer out of ya?

Though I've been a member of this board for a long time, I rarely surf it as I don't find it worthwhile to argue about audio formats as long as I myself am happy with my configuration (once you get into mid-high-end audio you don't use computers anyway), but we're talking about a potential upgrade here. I show up occasionally to ask stupid questions that have been asked a billion times, so here I am!

You'll see me much more actively over at Head-Fi.

That doesn't necessarily have to be the case.

Well, what I really meant is that this kind of question has been asked AND answered so many times that no one who's been around for a year and a half can pretend not to know the answer.

LAME 3.90.3 api vs. MPC --standard

is sooooooooo passé.

Here's a tip though: use WavPack lossy with -hb384x and then transcode to the lossy codec du jour when needed. The best of both world. (If you can afford it (space wise) of course)

Here's what i think is most _probably_ what happened:

- You compared MP3s encoded with sub-optimal settings (i.e. 192kbit CBR instead of preset standard/v2) with MPC. And noticed a difference between the two.
- You also compared MP3s encoded with good encoders and HQ-settings (i.e. the overkill 320kbit CBR) with MPC and imagined to hear a difference (placebo)
- The above two cases then mixed together and formed a common impression for you

This of course is just guessing from my personal experience and that of others. Maybe you indeed can tell the difference, but no one knows that yet because you didn't do any double-blind-tests. While it is true that theoretically MPC is superior to MP3 even when the MP3 was encoded at preset insane, in practice, the situation usually is more like: with normal music (not short killer-samples) MP3 is transparent to almost everyone at preset standard - and with MPC you can get transparency at 30-40kbps lower bitrate.

So, in a real-world scenario, the answer is: both formats can be transparent - but MPC will achieve that at lower average bitrate than MP3.

- Lyx

Citay explained it correctly: mp3 has native flaws which makes transparency an impossible task (whatever the bitrate) with some signals (attacks -> pre-echo).

These mp3 native flaws: are they someting that LAME 4 might be trying to resolve? I guess one of the LAME devs can only answer this.

No. MP3 is MP3, and even LAME 5 can't solve this issue (at least if lame 5 is still layer III compliant).

Can't I just get a straight answer out of anyone? Especially Radetzky. As far as I'm concerned if you're not going to contribute anything useful, you might as well not post. That said, tell me the answer dammit!

What is it exactly you want to know?? You ask if MPC is widely supported. You already know the answer, NO! People have mentioned that several times. Is far as I know there is not one single hardware player that supports MPC at the moment. I do know there are a few attempts to make it so though...

And yes, MPC sounds better in almost every case against MP3. But I can assure you that MPC "sounds so much better with more depth and crisper sound" (or whatever) is placebo. At least if we're talking about newer versions of LAME and in the transparency range. The difference is not that obvious. If I remember correctly, Winamp has (or used to have) this equalizer issue where MPC files sound different than MP3s. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here.

I hope this didn't come out too harsh, but your questions have been asked over and over in the past and I can understand if some get fed up with posts like these.

Okay, look, you seem to be a hard to please kind of guy. So, I
decided, accepting the fact that I *AM* your bitch, that I would give
it another go. I took your inital post, and extracted every questions
out of it. I will give a legit answer to all of 'em. I sincerely
hope you will be pleased.



Of course.



Please visit musepack.net. You will find plugins for different
media-players on Microsoft Windows and Linux. On Mac OS X, the
situation is less than desirable if I remember correctly.

If you were referring to setup boxes or DAPs, well... please use a
tool called "Google" (hint: the answer is "no".).

And be more precise.


Well, that's it. Those were your questions.

Have a nice day!

Radetzky!

There is an obscure Chinese player that plays MPC, I guess that doesn't really count. Some handhelds can play MPCs too, if you use betaplayer but for the most part you are right.

Really?! Which one? Got a link? I wish you could just upload the decoder to the player and play:)

Ouch, that was the most digging I have had to do to find a thread in a while. For a second I thought I might have imagined reading about this player .

All right, guess that MP3 file I have is just ripped wrong or something, explaining the large difference in quality. It's not placebo, don't worry, I've trained myself against that.

I will probably end up converting to mpc when and if Sony ever has mpc support for NetMD.

You mean when hell freezes over?

I imagine NetMD will be long dead by the time MPC has support for any portable non-PDA device. And no Sony product will ever support MPC unless a third party produces an interface software.

It's obscure becuase it's almost like lore on this forum.I think a supposed developer of this player posted here long ago and got a lot of hopes up. I think there was a link to the product specs posted, but no commercial link to buy the product. Your flashback may vary.