Talk:ATRAC

message: Shouldn't be every occurence of "128 kbit/s" bitrate replaced with 132 kbps? Has someone more information? Picasso Pablo 11:54, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The 132kbps bitrate is used by the original ATRAC3 codec, which corresponds to LP2 mode on the MDLP recorders.  The 128kbps bitrate is used by ATRAC3plus codec, and its support is limited to few devices, PSP and some Flash Memory based Walkmans.  None of the Minidisc units nor ATRAC CD Players support the 128kbps bitrate. 69.228.3.99 00:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  128 kbps vs. 132 kbps 

message: .oma files, which add DRM encryption, use ATRAC encoding, but not always the other way around.  For years, MiniDisc players did not have DRM and used ATRAC.  It wasn't until recently, with the advent of the NetMD and recorders that could upload files through a non-audio interface, that DRM has been used.
Likewise, SCMS, which has always beeon used on the MD, as well as DAT and DCC and is also a form of DRM, isn't strictly part of ATRAC.  Because of this, if Sony decided to make a video game system or car stereo or new type of telephone and needed to compress audio, they could use a chipset supporting ATRAC and not use any form of DRM if they wanted to.
--Jkonrath 21:41, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doesn't ATRAC files (.oma extension files) have DRM encryption? 

message: The double blind test referenced used VBR MP3, which is stated in the article. But VBR generally does sound better than constant bit rate, so surely to say that this test shows that 132 kbps ATRAC3 sounds worse than 128 kbps (CBR implied) is invalid. --Nathan (Talk) 00:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So how do you propose it should be changed? While the logic in the article may be invalid, 132kbps ATRAC3 probably does sound worse than 128kbps MP3. --KJ 04:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[ATRAC#ATRAC3 LP2 Mode|ATRAC3 LP2 Mode]] section 

message: When I came to this article this afternoon looking for some technical information, the layout of the article caught my eye as it seems to fail to completely adhere to the NPOV requirements. Looking further, a number of lines were deleted as of April 1st and other lines changed(all without citations), significantly shifting the tone of the article. The revision prior to this also seems to be weighted however, so I am not convinced the edits of April 1st were malicious, but I am not an expert in compression in any way, so I can not objectively determine what the proper description should be.
Overall, I find this article lacking in both a proper NPOV position and in citations for the double-blind tests mentioned, and hence am nominating it for a NPOV check as part of a larger process to correct the shortcomings in this article.
User:163.120.75.137 15:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV Check 

message: How about a list of computer programs that can play or encode ATRAC3 files? All this information about the codec is pretty much useless if you can’t actually use the codec. —Frungi 16:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sure, but how do you play it? 

message: does anyone knows where i can find an AT3 to MP3 converter? or just a windows based AT3 player please? thanks. Wikiprout 02:19, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: AT3 to MP3

message: I would like to see if anyone would object to me adding a link to our site, The Lossless Audio Blog? Our site tries to bridge the gap between the forums and the various Lossless Audio Guides by providing information on getting started with lossless audio formats as well as current news and information. Because the Wiki pages for lossless audio formats are such a great place for those learning about the various formats I feel that our site compliments this and have heard from a lot of users voicing the same opinion. If you have any questions or concerns let me know.
Thanks for the consideration!
Windmiller 12:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add Link 

message: Do you think ATRAC contributes to Vendor lock-in?  Would it help to have a category identifying :Category:Non-interoperable systems?  The issue is being voted on, please contribute your vote / opinion:  here. Pgr94 23:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vendor lock-in? 

message: This entry seems to be free from any comparison of ATRAC to other formats, or the availability of ATRAC on non-Sony gear. --24.249.108.133 05:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms? 

message: I browsed the article briefly, and as I understand it there are no software players (i.e. Windows- or Mac-based applications) for this format. Am I correct? Also, the article says, "Sony has all but dropped the ATRAC related codecs in the USA and Europe and their SonicStage powered 'Connect' Music Service (Sony's equivalent of iTunes) on 31 March 2008." Dropped in favor of what exactly? SharkD (talk) 03:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Software players? 

message: Under the ATRAC1 section the information between the parentheses that has a citation needed tag, I think it's only trying to clarify the definition of transparency in this context. Perhaps if it were differently worded, for example, replacing the text between the parentheses with "transparency meaning that it is not possible for most listeners tell the difference between the encoded sound and it's source". Would this be more NPOV?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by The Phool (talk • contribs) 08:20, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transparency 

message: This article busies itself ONLY with technical details, probably in far too much detail for an Wikipedia entry (WP:NOTMANUAL).
It should discuss ATRACs role in consumer media, its reception in the marketplace, competing standards (and products).
There is not a single word on how Sony's decision to use a proprietary format probably doomed its efforts to gain market share. Not a single word on the flop that is the minidisc. No general discussion around the folly of trying to hold back the digital revolution.
90.229.34.175 (talk) 07:03, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison and historical significance 

message: Used in PS4, PSVita consoles. at9 extension. Can not find much info except FMOD and Audiokinetic Wwise middleware support it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by OxybelisR (talk • contribs) 20:46, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  ATRAC9 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Adaptive Transform Acoustic Coding. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726052149/http://git.ffmpeg.org/?p=ffmpeg;a=blob;f=libavcodec/atrac1.c;hb=HEAD to http://git.ffmpeg.org/?p=ffmpeg;a=blob;f=libavcodec/atrac1.c;hb=HEAD
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726052201/http://git.ffmpeg.org/?p=ffmpeg;a=blob;f=libavcodec/atrac3.c;hb=HEAD to http://git.ffmpeg.org/?p=ffmpeg;a=blob;f=libavcodec/atrac3.c;hb=HEAD
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:55, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Which file extensions do each ATRAC1, ATRAC3, ATRAC3plus, ATRAC9, and ATRAC Advanced Lossless use?
* ATRAC1
** ????
* ATRAC3
** at3 ?
* ATRAC3plus
** at3 ?
* ATRAC Advanced Lossless
** ???
* ATRAC9
** .at9
Filename extension 	
.aa3 | .oma | .at3 | .at9
-- Chief38956 (talk) 15:10, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  File extensions for ATRAC 

message: This section seems to be sourced solely on a bit of ad copy and/or runs into WP:PRIMARY issues. With the format being briefly lived and, if forum posts are anything to go by, limited to PC playback and barely put to use, it seems impossible to find a better source. Should a  tag just be tacked on and left to languish? — VariousDeliciousCheeses (talk) 13:29, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I have added additional sources to the article and made a good structure. You can check again if the article is fine based on your concerns. --Morita Akio (talk) 11:10, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding ATRAC Lossless 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved as requested.  Dekimasuよ! 05:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Adaptive Transform Acoustic Coding →  – Wouldn't it be better for the title to be simply ATRAC based on WP:COMMON + considering these initials aren't used for another topic + this title format is also used for WAV and FLAC instead of the full names? Morita Akio (talk) 11:09, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 9 May 2022 

message: "All digital Walkman players outside Japan no longer worked with ATRAC after September 2007"
Does that mean 'Outside Japan, all digital Walkman players people had bought stopped playing tracks in ATRAC in September 2007' (similar to the way that Microsoft's DRM schemes have stopped people using things they had bought for their music player/ebook reader at least twice) or 'they could no longer buy new ATRAC-encoded tracks'? The reference probably makes it clear, but it's in Japanese and I don't want to rely on a not very good machine translation. Lovingboth (talk) 21:36, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened in September 2007?