Nero AAC, listening test :-) |
  |
Nero AAC, listening test :-) |
 Jun 4 2003, 22:33
Post
#51
|
|
 Rarewares admin Group: Members Posts: 7515 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Brazil Member No.: 81  |
QUOTE (spoon @ Jun 4 2003 - 06:25 PM) How do Codecs with VBR fit in with 128Kbps? to be fair to WMA it should be VBR 2 pass, not that it will win  Well, it would be a VBR/ABR test, except for atrac3. As Ivan already explained several times on the QuickTime 6.3 announcement thread, AAC CBR is almost ABR, due to the big bit reservoir. -------------------- Get up-to-date binaries of Lame, AAC, Vorbis and much more at RareWares:
http://www.rarewares.org |
 |
 
|
|
Jun 4 2003, 22:41
Post
#52
|
|
 Group: Members (Donating) Posts: 3474 Joined: 7-November 01 From: Strasbourg (France) Member No.: 420 |
QUOTE (rjamorim @ Jun 4 2003 - 09:39 PM) QUOTE (Tripwire @ Jun 4 2003 - 05:33 PM) If you take WMA9, be sure to use both Std and Pro. As I understand, there's no difference between them. WMA pro is just WMA for high bit depths, high sampling rates and multichannel. It isn't even possible to encode a 44100/stereo/16bit sample with it. There's a difference between them. WMApro is able to encode : • stereo files • 44100 hertz files • at low bitrate, using VBR settings |
|
|
|
|
Jun 4 2003, 22:52
Post
#53
|
|
|
Rarewares admin Group: Members Posts: 7515 Joined: 30-September 01 From: Brazil Member No.: 81 |
QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jun 4 2003 - 06:41 PM) There's a difference between them. WMApro is able to encode : ? stereo files ? 44100 hertz files ? at low bitrate, using VBR settings I couldn't reach these settings on CoolEdit 2.1 WMA output plugin. What program should I use to encode with WMA pro? What what's the difference? Slower encoding, better quality? -------------------- Get up-to-date binaries of Lame, AAC, Vorbis and much more at RareWares:
http://www.rarewares.org |
|
|
|
|
Jun 4 2003, 23:04
Post
#54
|
|
 dBpowerAMP developer Group: Developer (Donating) Posts: 2653 Joined: 24-March 02 Member No.: 1615 |
The profile options for WMApro are 2 channel only if is 24 bit, or 16 bit only if is 6 channel.
-------------------- Spoon http://www.dbpoweramp.com
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 4 2003, 23:13
Post
#55
|
|
 ABC/HR developer, ff123.net admin Group: Developer (Donating) Posts: 1396 Joined: 24-September 01 Member No.: 12 |
QUOTE (rjamorim @ Jun 4 2003 - 01:52 PM) QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jun 4 2003 - 06:41 PM) There's a difference between them. WMApro is able to encode : ? stereo files ? 44100 hertz files ? at low bitrate, using VBR settings I couldn't reach these settings on CoolEdit 2.1 WMA output plugin. What program should I use to encode with WMA pro? What what's the difference? Slower encoding, better quality? You don't have to worry about WMA just yet, do you? Isn't this for a future test? But WMA9 Pro is different from WMA9 standard -- it sounds better, at least on one sample I tried at 64 kbit/s. You can access it from within the Windows Media Encoder. Also probably from Spoon's dBPowerAmp (although I haven't checked to make sure). It's kind of a maze trying to figure out just how to make WME give you access to the WMA9 Pro settings. ff123 This post has been edited by ff123: Jun 4 2003, 23:13 |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th June 2013 - 10:29 |
