From: Christopher Woods <christof_at_infinitus.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2006 15:39:48 -0000

I don't have that build installed, but to me it sounds like the bitrate
option is just shown all the time, even though its setting only actually
applies if you have MP3 chosen as your destination file format.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thom Johansen [mailto:thomj_at_pvv.ntnu.no]
> Sent: 01 November 2006 14:01
> To: Rockbox
> Subject: Re: Sound Quality Settings
>
> Rich De Steno wrote:
> > I use Rockbox with the voice option. I installed an
> updated version
> > of Rockbox from a few days ago on my Iriver H120 and I noticed some
> > changes from my previous version, including a choice of
> recording bit
> > rates. I know that bit rate determines the quality of MP3
> files, but
> > I did not know that bit rates were associated with WAV files. What
> > was the bit rate at before we had a choice? Has the bug been fixed
> > yet relating to not being able to stop a recording with the STOP
> > button? Are there any plans to allow for recording in the
> Ogg Vorbis
> > or some other more compact format? How about ability to
> set the clock?
>
> The bit rate for WAVs is decided by the number of bits per
> sample, the number of channels and the sample rate. At 44100
> Hz sample rate, stereo and 16 bit samples, the bit rate is
> 1411 kbps, which is AFAIK the only bit rate Rockbox has been
> capable of recording since recording was included. Right now
> there's also an option to record mono files, which would
> halve the bit rate. Also, as far as I know, you really don't
> have a choice now either. The only WAV quality option I can
> find is the full quality one.
> As for recording in more compact formats, we currently
> support MP3, which as you probably know is lossy, and Wavpack
> (WV) which is a lossless format.
> Ogg Vorbis will probably not be supported for a good while
> thanks to seeming to need a more powerful CPU than we have in
> what targets we currently support.
> What do you mean about setting the clock? Sample rate? If so,
> this is something you can expect seeing in the not too distant future.
>
> Thom
>
>
Received on 2006-11-01