ATRAC3 vs MP3

[yup]

Hi folk!
Recently I buy CD Walkman D-NE9 and headphones Koss Porta-pro. This player can play Audio-CD, MP3-CD and ATRAC-CD. ATRAC Adaptive Transform Acoustic Coding. MD player use this codec. I try finding information about comparing ATRAC and MP3. Many sources speak that ATRAC3 at 132kb/s better than MP3 at 128kb/s. I try make two CD on one writing MP3 at 128kb/s CBR and other ATRAC3 132kb/s (using software SonicStage was with player). For my opinion ATRAC3 better than MP3 and quality equalized approximately at 192kb/s MP3. I use last version LAME with different quality. If any interesting this problem let me know. May I need use special parameter for LAME for best quality. Advise me link about ATRAC.
With kind regards yup.

[KpeX]

Personally I have no experience with the ATRAC3 compression scheme, but IMO you'd be much better off with MP3 - you will have greater compatibility and excellent quality. For encoding MP3, it is recommended to use lame and the --alt-preset standard parameter. See the MP3 FAQ linked in my signature for more information.

These links on ATRAC3 may be of interest:

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?showtopic=3373&st=0&&#entry32792

http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15851

http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16534

http://www.minidisc.org/aes_atrac.html

[echo]

Using ATRAC 132kbps should be better than mp3 128kbps CBR but I don't think it would be better than 128 kbps ABR. The --alt-preset standard that KpeX is suggesting should give you a much higher bitrate. Take a look here (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?showtopic=203&) for a list of suggested lame settings and their corresponing bitrates. Make your own tests and follow what your ears tell you... :)

regards echo

[yup]

Kpex and Echo!
Thank You for reply and espicialy for link.
yup.