Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Z0001]

Hi all

I need to do a batch convert of my lossless music library to a lossy format for my Samsung phone. Are there benefits of using Batch Ripper over J River or vice versa? I am assuming the quality is the same.

MC seems convenient as I can specify a file path based on my custom tags. Will the conversion allow me to specify dynamic path naming based on library fields?

Is either faster or have some particular benefit?

Thanks!
Z

[MGD_King]

I use MC for this exact same task, but what I do is convert the files to a folder on my PC and then move them over to my Samsung device because 64bit MC doesn't recognize my phone, or at least not the last time I tried. MC is fast enough to convert hundreds, if not thousands, of files and like you mentioned, the ease of creating the file names and folder structures based off of your tags makes it too easy. If you have the space on your phone, convert them to 320k MP3, assuming you're converting to MP3. What type of phone do you have? My S8 plays FLAC natively but I still convert to MP3 because I don't want to waste space on my phone, and lets me honest, can the sound quality of a phone really be worth having FLAC files?

[Z0001]

Thanks. All makes sense. I have an S5 with 128GB card. I'm happy to use any lossy format so long as it's best audio/storage outcome.

I take it you think mp3 320k is reasonable balance in this regard?

[RD James]

I was curious since I own both, so I ran a test to compare the two.
Converting 2000 files (40GB of FLACs) to 320K CBR MP3s took Media Center 21 minutes, while dBpoweramp did this in 13.
The test was run on a 16 thread Ryzen 1700X and on an NVMe SSD.
 
Media Center was significantly faster at actually setting up the conversion and gave feedback on how many files it was analyzing when I dropped them into the main window, while dBpoweramp just froze up for a couple of minutes when I selected the folder.
 
I think the main reason that dBpoweramp was so much faster at the conversion is that it can process 16 files at a time while Media Center is limited to 8.
CPU usage with dBpoweramp was ~90% most of the time, while Media Center was only ~50% (as you might expect when only converting 8 files on a 16 thread CPU).
Of course if you're converting form an HDD rather than an SSD it's entirely possible that you would be I/O limited in both, and being able to process 16 files rather than 8 doesn't mean anything if you only have a 2, 4, or 8 thread CPU.
 
If your device supports AAC, I recommend setting up QAAC as an external encoder whichever program you use, rather than MP3.
AAC is the highest quality lossy format with widespread support, and QAAC has a 'true VBR' mode which is extremely high quality.
The 'True VBR' mode produces large files though; 40-50% the size of FLAC, while something lower quality like 256k might only be be 1/3 the size of FLAC.
Some information on setting that up here: https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,113115.msg782431.html#msg782431

[JimH]

It's been a long time since we discussed this, but it may be the MP3 encoder being used.  You may be able to find the discussions with a search.

Here's one of the encoders:
http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Gogo

and it can be used in MC if you prefer it.

The decision on which encoder to use was based on quality.

[RD James]

Both were set to use LAME with the same settings for the MP3 encoding - though I suppose it's possible that they were still using different encoder versions/forks.
I ran a smaller test converting 236 tracks (5GB) with both programs using QAAC as an external encoder and the results were similar.
dBpoweramp completed the test in 1:35 while Media Center took 2:40.
 
As before, the main difference seems to be that Media Center is limited to converting 8 tracks at once, while dBpoweramp can convert 16 tracks at a time.
It stands out quite noticeably when you look at the difference in CPU usage, with dBpoweramp keeping the CPU almost fully utilized throughout the conversion, while it's sitting half-idle with Media Center.
It looks like there may be something which is causing stalls in Media Center's conversion too, as the graph looks quite spiky compared to dBpoweramp.
 
If it's of interest, for this group of files QAAC with the True VBR option compressed the tracks to 37% of the FLAC filesize, which is pretty good for what is almost the same quality as lossless encoding.

[MGD_King]

I take it you think mp3 320k is reasonable balance in this regard?

Absolutely. I use my phone to connect to car's system via Bluetooth and it sounds great. I've tried FLAC in my car and haven't noticed a difference, and that may be due to it being a Bluetooth connection. I can, however, tell a difference between 320k and 192k and lower.

[RD James]

Absolutely. I use my phone to connect to car's system via Bluetooth and it sounds great. I've tried FLAC in my car and haven't noticed a difference, and that may be due to it being a Bluetooth connection. I can, however, tell a difference between 320k and 192k and lower.

If you're using Bluetooth there's no need for lossless files, since Bluetooth itself is a lossy connection.
If you're creating lossy files for portable playback, AAC is recommended over MP3 if your device supports it (most should) because it provides higher audio quality at the same filesize.
The 'True VBR' option with the QAAC encoder is nearly indistinguishable from lossless.
 
Hopefully Media Center can be updated to support AAC encoding (preferably QAAC) natively instead of having to configure it as an external encoder - though you only have to configure it once.

[JimH]

If you're using Bluetooth there's no need for lossless files, since Bluetooth itself is a lossy connection.

I don't believe that Bluetooth is a "lossy" connection. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth

It's just a radio connection and doesn't include compression in the standard, as far as I know.

[mattkhan]

pretty sure that all bluetooth audio is compressed, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SBC_(codec) is the default I think, more recent devices might support things like aptx or aptx hd and then I think there is a sony codec (https://www.sony.net/Products/LDAC/) which offers potentially higher bit & sample rate (but still lossy)

[RD James]

pretty sure that all bluetooth audio is compressed, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SBC_(codec) is the default I think, more recent devices might support things like aptx or aptx hd and then I think there is a sony codec (https://www.sony.net/Products/LDAC/) which offers potentially higher bit & sample rate (but still lossy)

That's correct. aptX-HD claimed to be "lossless" at one point - and may even still make that claim - but it's a high bitrate lossy codec.
LDAC supports even higher bitrates (almost double), but it's exclusive to Sony hardware and makes no such claims of being lossless.

Unless you are going to be using the device via an analog connection or with an external USB DAC, there's little reason to store lossless tracks on storage-limited devices when high bitrate AAC is so good.
I wouldn't use MP3 unless it's the only thing your hardware supports.