Concerns about MC9 "skipping" report.
I've been trying to find out more about the issue in this thread:
http://www.ipodlounge.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=360
It basically complains of some sort of "skipping" issue that is solved by using Ephpod instead of Media Center 9. Is this a common issue? I am looking for the easiest, most problem free software to manage my iPod, and I was thinking that MC9 may be the one. This post, however, has me concerned, so I'm trying to find out as much about it as possible.
Are there plenty of people using MC9 with NO problems such as songs being encoded with corruption or songs skipping over certain sections?
Thanks for feedback on this,
Larry
[713 byte] By [
lalittle] at [2007-11-9 12:18:26]
# 1 Re: Concerns about MC9 "skipping" report.
Hi!
I use MC9 (and begrudginly, MusicMatch - to get my playlist alarms working) - A few of my tracks skipped (annoying), but re-encoding them through MC9 using the LAME codec returns great results - all my dodgey tracks now play perfectly!
MC9 is by far the easiest application i have found for managing my (and my girlfriends) ipod's. Rips CD's, tags untagged tracks, and uploads really fast, as well as loads of stuff to do with playlists. Only annoyance is that the playlists it creates cant be used as an alarm .... yet!
edit: forgot to say, all teh dodgey tracks were old mp3 files - all ripped before ipods even existed. Ripping therough MC9 has never resulted in the track skipping/silence problems. I use LAME 3.90 with the highly recommended alt-preset standard, by the way.
# 2 Re: Concerns about MC9 "skipping" report.
I have never once had that problem, and I've used MC9 from day one of it's inception...I think it's pretty darned stable right now as is, especially the 9.0.180 version, and would strongly recommend it.
I, however, am a glutton for punishment, so I've been using the 9.1 beta versions, which I prefer to 9.0.180, and they've performed fantastic so far...But don't go this route unless you're prepared for some bugs (can anyone say "unicode"?) cropping up--stick with 9.0.180
dmt1 at 2007-11-15 17:23:38 >
# 3 Re: Concerns about MC9 "skipping" report.
I use LAME 3.90 with the highly recommended alt-preset standard, by the way.
So is that NOT the LAME encoder that comes with MC9? I thought that the one that comes with MC9 is a newer one (3.93). If so, how necessary is this over using the one that comes with MC9? Is it possible that using the encoder that comes with MC9 is to blame for some of the problems?
Do most people find that VBR produces "better" results than CBR (i.e. better sounding as well as less problematic)? I've read conflicting reports on this -- i.e. some people have said that VBR can actually lead to some anomalies and therefore say sticking with CBR is best. What's the consensus here on this? Is there really any down side to using VBR?
Thanks again,
Larry
# 4 Re: Concerns about MC9 "skipping" report.
No, the MC9 encoder is probably not the issue. I use the 3.90.2 version through MC9 as an external encoder, but there isn't a huge difference. Here is the rationale behind what I do, how I do it, and why(it is admittedly a little on the anally retentive side, but the results are fantastic), scattered throughout this thread:
http://ipodlounge.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=639
What I do is considered overkill by some, but IMHO this is the best you're going to get w/r to ripping/encoding with MC9, short of going 320 CBR...
dmt1 at 2007-11-15 17:25:41 >
