NSTL WMA Pro listening test, MS claims test proves WMA Pro > HE-AAC |
NSTL WMA Pro listening test, MS claims test proves WMA Pro > HE-AAC |
 Jan 11 2006, 21:40
Post
#1
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 1559 Joined: 24-June 02 From: Catalunya(Spain) Member No.: 2383  |
QUOTE (gameplaya15143 @ Jan 11 2006, 03:32 AM) i think they are 'supposed' to represent a % quality.. but they are just high-to-low (or should it say low-to-lower... uh oh.. i better watch out for tos8)  Have you heard problems with a ~240Kbps VBR (Q98) wma 9.1 file to say it is low quality? |
 |
 
|
 |
|
Jan 12 2006, 01:01
Post
#2
|
|
 Group: Members Posts: 1355 Joined: 9-January 05 From: JJ's office. Member No.: 18957 |
QUOTE ([JAZ] @ Jan 11 2006, 12:40 PM) QUOTE (gameplaya15143 @ Jan 11 2006, 03:32 AM) i think they are 'supposed' to represent a % quality.. but they are just high-to-low (or should it say low-to-lower... uh oh.. i better watch out for tos8) Have you heard problems with a ~240Kbps VBR (Q98) wma 9.1 file to say it is low quality? How about this new report (DBT and all) on WMA Pro quality? http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsme...Comparison.aspx -------------------- -----
J. D. (jj) Johnston |
|
|
|
|
Jan 14 2006, 08:02
Post
#3
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 1355 Joined: 9-January 05 From: JJ's office. Member No.: 18957 |
I must admit that I am both offended and annoyed by the various insinuations in this thread. Hence, I shall say nothing here, and await evidence of the various insinuations and suggestions.
-------------------- -----
J. D. (jj) Johnston |
|
|
|
 |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 23rd May 2013 - 18:01 |
