Podcast sample rate

[michael norman]

On 27/07/17 17:39, RS wrote:
>> From: michael norman Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2017 13:37
> 
>> I have always used hardware players by which I assume you mean 
>> portable players to listen to music.  Those used to be called mp3 
>> players culminating in the iPOD I suppose.  Nowadays I still do that 
>> and having used various Cowon models in the past I now use a Fii0 X1.
> 
> Yes I do mean portable or MP3 players.  Thanks for the suggestion but 
> the Amazon description of the Fii0 X1 is a good example of what I have 
> been up against.  There is no indication in it of which file formats the 
> device supports.

The X1 plays anything I can throw at it, see this review

https://www.cnet.com/uk/news/fiio-x1-finally-a-high-resolution-music-player-that-wont-empty-your-bank-account/

Before that I used Cowon players that did pretty much the same thing but 
didn't play hi res files, but I don't have any of those.  I have never 
used Sandisk models. but I have never had a problem playing MP3 files on 
the devices I've used.  If players purport to play AAC files and don't 
then that is surely something the buyer should take up with whoever 
supplied the device.  I read the exchanges about the Linn player, which 
like all Linn stuff costs big money, certainly more money than I've ever 
had, and I have lusted after Linn stuff for a long time, whether the guy 
who posted that issue got a satisfactory response from Linn I can't 
remember.
> 
> You want to play FLAC and OGG files from ripped CDs.  Several of the 
> cheap players will play FLAC and OGG without problem.  I want mainly to 
> play speech radio programmes from the BBC.  Some are available as MP3 
> podcasts, but most are delivered by get_iplayer as AAC .  That is why I 
> find it frustrating when players claim to support AAC-LC but don't or 
> don't properly.  It is not a question of price.  One person had a 
> problem playing long AAC files with a Linn player, and I gather they 
> sell for several thousand pounds.  The SanDisk Clip Jam has come down in 
> price and is now about £25.  I have been very lucky in that SanDisk 
> support has fixed the problem I had with AAC within about two months.
> 
> I thought my satellite receiver played AAC-LC files without problem.  I 
> have just discovered that although it does start to play them it stops 
> at a point which is repeatable for each file but is very different from 
> one file to another.  For example the 320kbit/s Radio 3 recording of 
> Prom 3, which includes the Schumann 2nd symphony you referred to, stops 
> at 41min 27s.  The 128kbit/s recording of the same Prom stops at 6min 31s.
> 
> It is not difficult to convert files to MP3, and MP3 has lot going for 
> it, especially in terms of compatibility.  Quality from the latest LAME 
> encoder is not far below AAC.  There are not many listening tests at 
> high bit rates, but it is generally accepted that transparency, absence 
> of audible artefacts no matter how difficult to encode the source 
> material, is achieved with 256kbit/s AAC or 320kbit/s LAME MP3.

Yes it is quite possible to convert one lossy format to another I can do 
that quite easily, and yes LAME is as good as that as it gets.  I will 
not accept that encoding a lossless file into a lossy one does not 
involve a loss of quality, and lots of people agree with me.  But that's 
another debate.
> 
>> The bigger question I suppose is how many devices can the BBC be 
>> expected to support on for their content.  Plus given that all of this 
>> is a moving target who if anybody could produce a list of which BBC 
>> modes work on which players ?  Or have I missed your point ?
> 
> There are extensions to AAC, called SBR and PS.  SBR is a more efficient 
> way of encoding high frequencies.  As Vangelis has pointed out, if the 
> player does not support SBR the high frequencies are lost.  PS is a 
> different way of encoding stereo.  If the player does not support PS, 
> all stereo information is lost.  10 years ago there was a need to reduce 
> bit rates to save memory.  Players now have much larger memories.  I 
> regard the extensions, together known as HE-AAC, as a retrograde step.  
> They are not used at bit rates of 128kbit/s and above.  I would prefer 
> the BBC always to make a mode of 128bit/s or higher available rather 
> than use HE-AAC.
> 
> As for the types of devices supported by the BBC, having a large number 
> is a good thing because it results in a wider choice of modes from 
> get_iplayer.

SBR PS whatever, none of those can put back what is lost by encoding a 
file downwards, information is lost.

I don't do AAC, MP3 or whatever but the rest of the world does, so I 
imagine my point might be is the BBC output flawed in some way, assuming 
it isn't can the BBC be expected to make up for deficiencies in 
available players ?

M