I have an iriver Clix2, and I can't decide what audio format to use for encoding my music albums.
I really like .ogg, both the quality and the open source philosophy, unfortunately i can't use it as it has no support for embedded album artwork and I can't synchronize ogg files with Windows Media Player 11.
So, I have to choose between mp3 and wma (std), as they both work well with WMP and have album artwork support. I know that theoretically wma provides better quality than mp3 at the same bitrate, but Microsoft i don't really trust Microsoft's claims.
My question is, would a WMA file at 160kbps, deliver the same quality as an mp3 at 192kbps?

WMA gives you less compatibility and quality at similar mp3 bitrate according to previous tests. The pro version is the quality version of wma but not really supported on any hardware players.

For high quality mp3 encoding you can try the LAME encoder at vbr quality 4 if you are aiming for 160k. Note: -V5 (130 k) is already stressing many peoples hearing for the last few years.

You should be able to synchronize your ogg file with WMP if you install the ogg codecs (http://www.normsoft.com/kb/idx/19/115/article/) Don't know if this works with WMP 11 since I would not touch WMP even with gloves on. Why do you need to sync it with WMP in the first place? I have an iRiver S10 and all I need is an empty usb port and it shows up as 2GB flash drive. Can it be any easier?

If you look around you will see that WMA (std) is out-performed by LAME at the same bit-rate (128kbps or higher, unfortunately this is the newest comparison I could find: http://www.rjamorim.com/test/multiformat128/results.html) so if I where you I would definitely go for mp3.

BTW, It seems like ogg vorbis does support album art (http://www.vorbis.com/faq/#container http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....48386&st=0) so why not settle for the best?

Apparently this program supports album art in ogg files http://www.softpointer.com/AudioShell.htm

/Kef

wmapro (not std) would do better than ogg, at least at low bitrates, judging from the recent test. I'd go with lame mp3 over wma standard, because better quality and wider compatibility. (note wmapro is less widely supported than wma std. wmapro is supported on cellphones running windows mobile and on windows of course, but not all that much more.) You may want to archive with a lossless format (wma lossless or flac).

Unfortunately Clix2 has problems with m3u playlists, and the only way to get playlists to work is to use the device in MTP mode, so I need to synchronize it with Windows Media Player. I tried to install the ogg directshow filters, but WMP will transcode the ogg files to wma when synchronizing. I allready use Tag&Rename but unfortunately if I embed an artwork in an ogg file, the Clix will not recognize the tag at all (strange, as the file plays without problems, and Tag&Rename does not write an ID3 tag, but just a vorbis comment). The same happens when using J.River Media Center.

I assume that what you meant to say is that most people are satisfied with -V5 quality and find it difficult to distinguish from the original.

Not in this case, because the Clix2 doesn't get its internal database updated, if files are transferred via the desktop environment. This forces one to search for songs using directory trees instead of tags, making the whole thing comparably uncomfortable. But going for Windows Media Player still isn't a good idea, due to iRiver's own plus 3 software supporting Vorbis transferring very well. I use it for managing the Clix2 myself.


The player doesn't read Base64 code.

I can't get playlists to work when using iriver3plus. For example if I have the same song in 3 playlists it will copy it 3 times, and 4GB is really little storage so I could tolerate this issue.

Yeah thats what I meant to say - stressing as in good quality..

Ok ... thanks for your help. I also did some ABX for the last 3 hours, and I think I'll go for mp3 at 175 (V3), lower than that I can distinguish from the original. 160kbps is also good, but I think I'll go a bit higher just to make sure. To be honest, in my test WMA provides a better quality, as I was no longer able to tell the difference between tracks at about 150-160kbps, but mp3 is more ubiquitous. Again, thanks for your help.

Oh ... just one more question ... Lame 3.97 or 3.85b5?

I'd use 3.98b5. Sand-paper noise problems removed as well as trumpet problem. More robust VBR mode.
3.98 is in high beta so it is expected pretty much to behave like the final version.

Unless you remove it via nLite or buy the Euro version that has it removed, you come in contact with WMP whether or not you use it, once you use Windows. WMP is really just a frontend for Windows' built-in media playback capability *shrugs*

I'd choose LAME, btw.

Vorbis and WMAPro were statistically tied (depending on who you ask). Also, 80 kbps is also a "low bitrate" and it has already been ABX'd by several golden-eared members here (in the recent past) as being superior (perhaps not statistically, however) to all the others. And let's not forget the older multiformat 128 kbps listening test conducted here where Vorbis was again at the top of the pack.

Well, wmapro is tied for first, unlike vorbis, and if you break things apart by individual subtests, wmapro sometimes blows vorbis out of the water, whereas the reverse is never as true, i.e. when ogg stumbles, it stumbles much more badly at this bitrate. However, I agree at higher bitrates vorbis *could* be better--BUT wmapro was not tested at those higher rates. I also wonder how wmapro would perform in VBR versus the CBR mode tested. wmapro is easier to use than ogg on windows or windows mobile because of the automatic wmp support. personally, i stick with mp3 but I don't go down as low as 64 kbps, only 128 kbps.

IIRC there is a setting within WMP where you can tell it not to transcode. It has been two years since I last used it to sync with a portable so I can't give you any guidance on how to find it.

Why no WMA@192?
Same size, but better quality!

Yes the option exists, but WMP will simply not synch the ogg files to the device saying that they are not supported.

I agree. For portable digital music, I convert everything to 192 Kbps CBR WMA. I first used VBR WMA, but then I discovered that my WMA player in my Acura did not support VBR so I changed. I think the sound quality is great and superior to similar sized MP3s. (And yes, I don't really like Microsoft either.)

it's widely recognised that 192kbits VBR MP3 is transparent for 99% of people. How can you get better than transparent?