|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Cingular cell phone service > April 2007 > AAC audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
AAC audio quality/capabilities of Motorola RAZR V3xx (aka IZAR)
|
|
| John Navas 2007-04-08, 12:33 pm |
| In addition to MP3, the Motorola RAZR V3xx supports (unprotected) AAC
audio. To test its AAC capabilities I encoded with Windows iTunes
7.1.1.5 from the same high-quality CD originals. The V3xx properly
played all bitrates (constant and variable) up to (and including) 320
Kbps.
Playback options for both MP3 and AAC audio include playlists, albums,
artists, genres, and composers, with optional auto-repeat and shuffle,
plus recently played, with the usual playback controls (skip
forward/back, fast forward/back, volume, play/pause). It also feature
external play/pause and volume with the flip is closed, with album and
track info on the external display.
In short, it's an excellent portable audio player.
On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 14:49:07 GMT, John Navas
< spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in
< 33uh13htrgdlrv1iju4t
5r627q27dp8f73@4ax.com>:
>To check out contradictory (and some negative) statements about the MP3
>audio capabilities of the new Motorola RAZR V3xx, I've run careful tests
>to see what it can and cannot handle, and how it sounds. My encoding
>was done with LAME 3.97 from high-quality CD originals.
>
>What I found is that the V3xx supports MP3 bitrates up to an _average_
>of 256 Kbps (320 Kbps peak).
>
>According to MP3'Tech <http://www.mp3-tech.org/tests/gb> ):
>
> 256kbs: The sound is indiscernible from the original. It is
> impossible to make the difference with the original recording.
>
> The quality at 128kbs is also indentical to the one obtained with the
> original CD on a mini or midi Hi-Fi installation, and on the vast
> majority of Hi-Fi installations in separated elements.
>
> Conclusion : For a computer use, the 128kbs rate produces a quality
> equal to an audio CD. But in the case of an MP3 use in advanced
> Hi-Fi, it is necessary to use a 256kbs bitrate to reach an identical
> result to the CD sound.
>
>In blind A-B listening tests of 256 Kbps ABR MP3 V3xx against the
>original CD source through a high-end home audio system, none my
>audience could hear any difference.
>
>I also compared 256 Kbps ABR MP3 V3xx to iTunes AAC encoding played back
>from a current generation video iPod. The V3xx was better than 128 AAC,
>and as good as 192 Kbps AAC.
>
>Hopefully that will put to rest claims that the V3xx isn't a good audio
>player.
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
|
| John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in
news:ne6i13hq79pp3h1
bpv5ii7u78id862o4is@
4ax.com:
What was the frequency response of all units tested? What was the
compression factor of each recording? Were the same speakers used to
playback each device, and if so, were they rated to work with each of the
devices? What is the advertised distortion rate for each amplifier used
(whether it be internal or external) and what was the advertised wattage of
each amplifier? How did the test devices compare to the advertised specs?
How many different acoustical test environments were used?
I already know that you are unable to answer these questions, as your tests
never have any controls associated with them. My fifth grader's last
science project had more controls than your precious little experiment.
But then again, he's not trying to shill for Motorola or Cingular.
| |
|
| Scott wrote:
> I already know that you are unable to answer these questions, as your tests
> never have any controls associated with them. My fifth grader's last
> science project had more controls than your precious little experiment.
I'm in the process of preparing a science presentation for fourth
graders for the school's enrichment day, and one key aspect of it is to
emphasize how important it is to use controls when doing measurements,
in order to ensure accuracy of the experimental results. Had I not been
subject to the claims of so many uncontrolled tests in this newsgroup, I
might have been less resolute in insisting that the students pay close
attention to the controls, and how they compare their experimental
results to the theoretical results.
| |
| Jack Mac 2007-04-08, 10:33 pm |
| On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 12:39:04 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>Scott wrote:
>
>
>I'm in the process of preparing a science presentation for fourth
>graders for the school's enrichment day, and one key aspect of it is to
>emphasize how important it is to use controls when doing measurements,
>in order to ensure accuracy of the experimental results. Had I not been
>subject to the claims of so many uncontrolled tests in this newsgroup, I
>might have been less resolute in insisting that the students pay close
>attention to the controls, and how they compare their experimental
>results to the theoretical results.
Well John, I suppose you expected such a response from Larry and Moe!
In making the comparison you made between the CD and the V3xx
using the same Amplifier and Speaker systems it makes no difference
what the specific responses are for them. These are common for both
devices!
| |
| Scott 2007-04-08, 10:33 pm |
| Jack Mac < camkcaj@parkspringsc
ommunities.com> wrote in
news:966j1398v8q2j02
pb9dj3be19k6neek9uh@
4ax.com:
> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 12:39:04 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Well John, I suppose you expected such a response from Larry and Moe!
> In making the comparison you made between the CD and the V3xx
> using the same Amplifier and Speaker systems it makes no difference
> what the specific responses are for them. These are common for both
> devices!
>
If by Larry and Moe, you are asserting our inability to take anything
Novice says at face value- thank you! If, OTOH, you are trying to slam us
for actually having more than pedestrian consumer experience in many of the
areas that Johnny tries to show expertise in- too bad, you missed your
mark.
To explain it to you- any amplification that was done would inevitably
produce distortion, as all of the playback devices he mentions using have
no line level output available and any device that is desined to handle the
amplified signal of one of these devices is biased towards that product.
If that confuses you (which I'm sure it does), try this little experiment.
Take an old home (not portable) CD player. Using the necessary adapters,
take the analog "line out" signal from the back of the unit and try to
listen to it either straight through speakers or headphones and let us know
how that works for you. That line level signal is free of any
amplification. Unlike the headphone jack on a Razr ot iPod, it not subject
to the exponential rate of distortion that they are when their amplified
signal is amplifeied again. The Razr has no such line level output
available.
The test is horrible flawed.
Now, Jack- wanna explain your take on the testing, or shall you simply
continue to look like Navas's lover?
| |
| John Navas 2007-04-09, 3:33 pm |
| On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 21:42:12 -0400, Jack Mac
< camkcaj@parkspringsc
ommunities.com> wrote in
< 966j1398v8q2j02pb9dj
3be19k6neek9uh@4ax.com>:
>On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 12:39:04 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
LOL :)
[color=darkred]
>Well John, I suppose you expected such a response from Larry and Moe!
Yep. As usual, they just stoop to ad hominems, having nothing
substantive to offer in rebuttal, just resentment and jealousy.
>In making the comparison you made between the CD and the V3xx
>using the same Amplifier and Speaker systems it makes no difference
>what the specific responses are for them. These are common for both
>devices!
True. Although a poor audio system could mask some differences, the
V3xx is a _portable_ audio player, and should be judged as such, driving
speakers typical of portable audio players. What I did was thus
overkill, since I used high-end home audio gear (quite a bit better than
the great majority of home audio systems, not to mention speakers
typical of portable audio players) in order to make any differences as
apparent as practical and possible, as noted in my report.
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| Scott 2007-04-09, 10:33 pm |
| John Navas < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote in
news:3f0l13dfhhf8r7p
sfulop2r1gp8pskv6lh@
4ax.com:
> On Sun, 08 Apr 2007 21:42:12 -0400, Jack Mac
> < camkcaj@parkspringsc
ommunities.com> wrote in
> < 966j1398v8q2j02pb9dj
3be19k6neek9uh@4ax.com>:
>
>
> LOL :)
>
>
> Yep. As usual, they just stoop to ad hominems, having nothing
> substantive to offer in rebuttal, just resentment and jealousy.
Wrong, Zippy- I wrote an entire post in this thread that is very
substantive and in typical fashion you are incapable of responding to
it. You can't deal with facts anymore and act more and more like a
senile old man.
>
>
> True. Although a poor audio system could mask some differences, the
> V3xx is a _portable_ audio player, and should be judged as such,
> driving speakers typical of portable audio players. What I did was
> thus overkill, since I used high-end home audio gear (quite a bit
> better than the great majority of home audio systems, not to mention
> speakers typical of portable audio players) in order to make any
> differences as apparent as practical and possible, as noted in my
> report.
>
Your third grade science project is far from the great thing you are
making it out to be.
| |
| xPosTech 2007-04-09, 10:33 pm |
| On 4/9/2007 6:32 PM, Scott wrote:
> John Navas < spamfilter1@navasgro
up.com> wrote in
> news:3f0l13dfhhf8r7p
sfulop2r1gp8pskv6lh@
4ax.com:
>
>
> Wrong, Zippy- I wrote an entire post in this thread that is very
> substantive and in typical fashion you are incapable of responding to
> it. You can't deal with facts anymore and act more and more like a
> senile old man.
>
>
>
> Your third grade science project is far from the great thing you are
> making it out to be.
Please don't give senility a bad rep.
--
Ted
I wasn't born in Texas but
I got back here as soon as I could
(Don't forget to take out the trash)
Hard work often pays off after time, but laziness always pays off now.
|
|
|
|
|