Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Is WMA Lossless really lossless? (Read 18585 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

My mistake was (seemingly) that I didn't look further than Adobe Audition. I used it for all the transcoding/converting, believing it wouldn't matter since I figured it would use an external encoder and decoder. Obviously, I am far from an expert on this, as written in the initial post. I appreciate the quick responses though and I've at least learned something from this. I'm leaving the rest intact for future reference or whatever.

This experiment of mine started on OiNK, but I have been told to post here too. I must say that I am no expert in this field, but I find my results pretty convincing. Here is what I originally posted, though slightly edited for BBCode-differences. Am I doing something terribly wrong?


Introduction.
I have come to the conclusion that WMA Lossless isn't lossless. It's lossy. My suspicions first began when I read about the format on Wikipedia and found this:
Quote
It compresses an audio CD to a range of 206 to 411MB, at bit rates of 470 to 940 kbit/s.
I think that most of you that read this know that CDs have a bitrate of 1411kbit and any truly lossless format should be able to reach that bitrate if need be. I could not verify the data on Wikipedia anywhere, so I decided to do some tests of my own. Below is a table with my results. (After I posted this, it was shown that WMA Lossless can and does go above 940kbit.)

How to interpret the table?
I have tested four songs. I first ripped them to WAV using EAC (which I have set up according to jiGGafellz' guide). When the ripping was complete, I wrote down the CRC that EAC reported for the track. After this, I encoded the WAV-file with "Windows Media Lossless 9.1 Lossless - VBR Quality 100, 44 kHz, 16 bit, stereo" (henceforth referred to as "WMA Lossless"). When this was complete, I converted the WMA-file to a raw PCM-file and used Hex Workshop to generate the PCM-file's CRC-32 and MD5 checksums (same as I've done with all files here). When this was done, I went back to the WAV-file and converted it to FLAC and then converted the FLAC-file to a raw PCM-file. With the last track, I also did APE, MP3 V0 and Ogg Q8.
  If the process has been been lossless, the CRC reported in EAC should be identical to the CRC generated from the PCM-file.

Code: [Select]
WMA lossless                                CRC-32          MD5
01 - Lumsk - Nidvisa (EAC)                  7BBEBB40        N/A
01 - Lumsk - Nidvisa.wav                    3D6B77FE        DF665856613CFA4204DC024C8EC9491F
01 - Lumsk - Nidvisa.wma                    8C2A185E        8333B77D49974CDC9C2C1E9432D4EE4F
01 - Lumsk - Nidvisa.pcm                    F0ACCD50        A8FEF7BCF2D420300774A52A453A7678

FLAC                                        CRC-32          MD5
01 - Lumsk - Nidvisa (EAC)                  7BBEBB40        N/A
01 - Lumsk - Nidvisa.wav                    3D6B77FE        DF665856613CFA4204DC024C8EC9491F
01 - Lumsk - Nidvisa.flac                   4180B1FE        02E3CBAC0D9D35640D45FD22A9177D09
01 - Lumsk - Nidvisa.flac.pcm               7BBEBB40        E44DFAFA1DF53E9047C71D345D2171C1

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WMA lossless                                CRC-32          MD5
02 - Lumsk - Allvis (EAC)                   0A220997        N/A
02 - Lumsk - Allvis.wav                     D63C2651        B81BE246617B1F12A0EDB7C87640E322
02 - Lumsk - Allvis.wma                     9A42BAFF        DE35F3EDF18D86E2814004EE82167853
02 - Lumsk - Allvis.pcm                     1562B26D        0B1B8491F3E0DEBCC43953F6B67C0E5F

FLAC                                        CRC-32          MD5
02 - Lumsk - Allvis (EAC)                   0A220997        N/A
02 - Lumsk - Allvis.wav                     D63C2651        B81BE246617B1F12A0EDB7C87640E322
02 - Lumsk - Allvis.flac                    C09B0FF1        D281E08C0269843A9D2A61926B91D0AE
02 - Lumsk - Allvis.flac.pcm                0A220997        0B813B94E00BB32AD24B32255C00569E

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WMA lossless                                CRC-32          MD5
02 - Hypocrite - In Blood We End (EAC)      F7595B16        N/A
02 - Hypocrite - In Blood We End.wav        B4F2FD50        10A7F2A19D3C02C5F0B6E73B90333800
02 - Hypocrite - In Blood We End.wma        863899E0        A43FCEC7104A1BDC72D1DC26E0745C21
02 - Hypocrite - In Blood We End.pcm        A9640374        4CC0EA67F2C778885575E3AEB37C517B

FLAC                                        CRC-32          MD5
02 - Hypocrite - In Blood We End (EAC)      F7595B16        N/A
02 - Hypocrite - In Blood We End.wav        B4F2FD50        10A7F2A19D3C02C5F0B6E73B90333800
02 - Hypocrite - In Blood We End.flac       09F4901F        532F8E6D31B6CEB12F269E369A0E51F4
02 - Hypocrite - In Blood We End.flac.pcm   F7595B16        46B554F6B31FA8F1A0211A74E6856303

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WMA lossless                                CRC-32          MD5
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull (EAC)          DC2B7760        N/A
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.wav            4306A0A9        3C7CE3A8FD9275A5E48C9EDC17A9912A
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.wma            E487DCF1        B413ABCE51071D0A654F4613E2EE9EAC
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.pcm            37056516        CE11778B500D5CE9630FD5CBE40A3611

FLAC                                        CRC-32          MD5
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull (EAC)          DC2B7760        N/A
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.wav            4306A0A9        3C7CE3A8FD9275A5E48C9EDC17A9912A
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.flac           7FE77755        CD057C8F125293C0284C8432FFED20BC
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.flac.pcm       DC2B7760        2C67B54837C14C40D12663156ED03E1E

APE                                         CRC-32          MD5
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull (EAC)          DC2B7760        N/A
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.wav            4306A0A9        3C7CE3A8FD9275A5E48C9EDC17A9912A
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.ape            DC2B0794        8939306BD7755CD4FB9BB9817C8D8299
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.ape.pcm        DC2B7760        2C67B54837C14C40D12663156ED03E1E

MP3 V0                                      CRC-32          MD5
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull (EAC)          DC2B7760        N/A
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.wav            4306A0A9        3C7CE3A8FD9275A5E48C9EDC17A9912A
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.mp3            A3FE6C2F        19228F57322CCDB240EC5C46AF6382C1
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.mp3.pcm        A99DCBD4        D488A72983EE02384BBE9183F1273DB3

Ogg Q8                                      CRC-32          MD5
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull (EAC)          DC2B7760        N/A
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.wav            4306A0A9        3C7CE3A8FD9275A5E48C9EDC17A9912A
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.ogg            61AA2B4E        B717A0A44CABB1B6AB9C60E6F7E91EBD
07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull.ogg.pcm        E6496C23        3C799FD14B035607E38F4981BF724E0B


Conclusion.
As is blatantly obvious, WMA Lossless is not lossless. In no case do the two CRCs match, while it matches in all cases with FLAC (and APE). WMA Lossless does, just like MP3 V0 and Ogg Q8 (or any other lossy format), damage the audio and should as such under no circumstances be used as a lossless format. Simply put: WMA Lossless is lossy.

To the current best of my knowledge, if the two CRCs don't match, the raw audio has been damaged and it is as such lossy. But the results did surprise me, since I would've thought someone else had figured this out sooner.

I don't know how reliable you find Adobe Audition to be, but I compared the tracks in a spectral analysis. I could see differences, but I decided to take extra precautions, so I took screenshots and made sure that everything was identical (except the spectral analysis, which was left intact). Then, I compared the PNG-files' checksums (CRC-32 and MD5 again). The FLAC and WAV match each other, whereas the WMA is different. APE matches, whereas MP3 V0 and Ogg Q8 failed. (The filenames are hyperlinks that lead the pictures. I did not use the same picture for WAV and FLAC, nor did I distort the WMA-picture myself.)

Code: [Select]
01 - Lumsk - Nidvisa               CRC-32          MD5
spectral_wav.png                   70BF8138        DC9D73A7D9459EC324454B50ACCE0CEB
spectral_wma.png                   7A25554A        D256CEBFA8FB911982B8B48B2FC579C0
spectral_flac.png                  70BF8138        DC9D73A7D9459EC324454B50ACCE0CEB
- Spectral difference and other files can be found here: http://www.lykanthropos.com/hosted/01%20-%20Lumsk%20-%20Nidvisa/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

02 - Hypocrite - In Blood We End   CRC-32          MD5
spectral_wav.png                   91A67A05        3A3E8777B0AD5754F1477CF66D505C08
spectral_wma.png                   34DA3FEA        2C24C2D268F7CB4E69258664882AB8A4
]spectral_flac.png                  91A67A05        3A3E8777B0AD5754F1477CF66D505C08
- Spectral difference and other files can be found here: http://www.lykanthropos.com/hosted/02%20-%20Hypocrite%20-%20In%20Blood%20We%20End/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

02 - Lumsk - Allvis                CRC-32          MD5
spectral_wav.png                   BD45E09F        E9A6487E94CF36C148FAC09A6EBC4733
spectral_wma.png                   3CE9547E        D903E5D815A67C6BE972EFF8F06FAA59
spectral_flac.png                  BD45E09F        E9A6487E94CF36C148FAC09A6EBC4733
- Spectral difference and other files can be found here: http://www.lykanthropos.com/hosted/02%20-%20Lumsk%20-%20Allvis/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

07 - Danzig - Kiss The Skull       CRC-32          MD5
spectral_wav.png                   95CEE2F1        9849208C6649DDF45BB54740473C12E3
spectral_wma.png                   A974FF73        000D99409C015050E388232DA3E9D78E
spectral_flac.png                  95CEE2F1        9849208C6649DDF45BB54740473C12E3
- Spectral difference and other files can be found here: http://www.lykanthropos.com/hosted/07%20-%20Danzig%20-%20Kiss%20The%20Skull/

spectral_ape.png                   95CEE2F1        9849208C6649DDF45BB54740473C12E3
spectral_mp3v0.png                 AD8853E8        980F8C178BA0E40D3B117680128C9C65
spectral_oggq8.png                 D7039852        C6E5B4988419508A55E66C7F72DA5105


I decided to try flacinhell's nowadays classical EXE-->FLAC-->EXE experiment, as described here. The results were somewhat strange. I include SHA1 here, because flacinhell does so in his experiment.
Code: [Select]
EXE-->FLAC-->EXE                    CRC-32      MD5                                 SHA1
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.exe           09B143EA    8E1E0AEBFB24B09066BD70301C957D93    88C940D9EA5A3BC0496B5EDA66428E564B88EBD9
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.raw           09B143EA    8E1E0AEBFB24B09066BD70301C957D93    88C940D9EA5A3BC0496B5EDA66428E564B88EBD9
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.wav           383BEAB8    2253A80E6AA0AC70A4814D4A28B4E1C4    9EDD63772A94E037579C08F94DC7DE2C168C7E1D
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.flac          68022AF7    9B7E145EF22112C96265681E52C27C95    EDB1AB6E7B1418CE883AE20A512A31C3DD31634B
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.flac.raw      09B143EA    8E1E0AEBFB24B09066BD70301C957D93    88C940D9EA5A3BC0496B5EDA66428E564B88EBD9
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.flac.raw.exe  09B143EA    8E1E0AEBFB24B09066BD70301C957D93    88C940D9EA5A3BC0496B5EDA66428E564B88EBD9

EXE-->WMA Lossless-->EXE            CRC-32      MD5                                 SHA1
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.exe           09B143EA    8E1E0AEBFB24B09066BD70301C957D93    88C940D9EA5A3BC0496B5EDA66428E564B88EBD9
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.raw           09B143EA    8E1E0AEBFB24B09066BD70301C957D93    88C940D9EA5A3BC0496B5EDA66428E564B88EBD9
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.wav           383BEAB8    2253A80E6AA0AC70A4814D4A28B4E1C4    9EDD63772A94E037579C08F94DC7DE2C168C7E1D
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.wma           C8B76543    7C14E2D28D2BB79260179667D1D4953C    DAD4EFC978B9DCE404327534C9313C16E5B141F4
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.wma.raw       E9BAFC54    970851A0660C45905213DB4377A1E556    94E72BA4C2E640AFC6E38157B2D4ACB4E044869E
Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.wma.raw.exe   E9BAFC54    970851A0660C45905213DB4377A1E556    94E72BA4C2E640AFC6E38157B2D4ACB4E044869E

As you can see, the final EXE-file matches the original one when compressed to and decompressed from FLAC. It does however not match when compressed to and decompressed from WMA Lossless. Both *.raw.exe-files do, however, run perfectly.

Still suspicious, I decided to try again with the Google logo. All files available here.
Code: [Select]
PNG-->FLAC-->PNG           CRC-32      MD5                                 SHA1
logo_plain.png             02E17AED    FC4B16804ABF8B4BD06AA27FDD722F1C    128D68FDE914D534FA1008D5E942A7D944069739
logo_plain.raw             02E17AED    FC4B16804ABF8B4BD06AA27FDD722F1C    128D68FDE914D534FA1008D5E942A7D944069739
logo_plain.wav             8F3E9E20    9E6761E529BC911D0D1EBC4CC612859E    5DCFEFF9E88826C43ACECBCF2CF434C67D3599EB
logo_plain.flac            F95B9FE7    DE00EDCE398168584DA5BD994C803CF1    29CD865D4FA00A296CB57FD7484BCC492EF5F06A
logo_plain.flac.raw        02E17AED    FC4B16804ABF8B4BD06AA27FDD722F1C    128D68FDE914D534FA1008D5E942A7D944069739
logo_plain.flac.raw.png    02E17AED    FC4B16804ABF8B4BD06AA27FDD722F1C    128D68FDE914D534FA1008D5E942A7D944069739

PNG-->WMA Lossless-->PNG   CRC-32      MD5                                 SHA1
logo_plain.png             02E17AED    FC4B16804ABF8B4BD06AA27FDD722F1C    128D68FDE914D534FA1008D5E942A7D944069739
logo_plain.raw             02E17AED    FC4B16804ABF8B4BD06AA27FDD722F1C    128D68FDE914D534FA1008D5E942A7D944069739
logo_plain.wav             8F3E9E20    9E6761E529BC911D0D1EBC4CC612859E    5DCFEFF9E88826C43ACECBCF2CF434C67D3599EB
logo_plain.wma             AECAE70B    5BE68DA29E7B4491A0B6E717693A318E    1A640EACE5B55DAF06CBFD2E826F765C241C5DC6
logo_plain.wma.raw         7198D517    321945D80022E645FEDF8145E42721E6    EDC649D276E533F406104CC014379EC35345C4DA
logo_plain.wma.raw.png     7198D517    321945D80022E645FEDF8145E42721E6    EDC649D276E533F406104CC014379EC35345C4DA

logo_plain.flac.raw.png is and looks identical to logo_plain.png, where as logo_plain.wma.raw.png is distorted.

I decided to try this again with my a picture of a fox. All files available here.
Code: [Select]
PNG-->FLAC-->PNG            CRC-32      MD5                                 SHA1
fox.png                     9F5CDEFD    CBD4DB4891DDBB0652E541F33C420C03    9080278B927C0FAD9CB71FF8145AA0307D512BAE
fox.raw                     9F5CDEFD    CBD4DB4891DDBB0652E541F33C420C03    9080278B927C0FAD9CB71FF8145AA0307D512BAE
fox.wav                     5A407D4B    CA1AE7B2F839997D95B2FCDB1B54539F    528CE82153D5BE9A9E7DF2464482F75207FE98A7
fox.flac                    BC70B7EA    0B0C95DDA0E62C62ED9A5FEC2355A013    E1F5289A57C248E3CB0523D10309A702D53D4D03
fox.flac.raw                9F5CDEFD    CBD4DB4891DDBB0652E541F33C420C03    9080278B927C0FAD9CB71FF8145AA0307D512BAE
fox.flac.raw.png            9F5CDEFD    CBD4DB4891DDBB0652E541F33C420C03    9080278B927C0FAD9CB71FF8145AA0307D512BAE

PNG-->WMA Lossless-->PNG    CRC-32      MD5                                 SHA1
fox.png                     9F5CDEFD    CBD4DB4891DDBB0652E541F33C420C03    9080278B927C0FAD9CB71FF8145AA0307D512BAE
fox.raw                     9F5CDEFD    CBD4DB4891DDBB0652E541F33C420C03    9080278B927C0FAD9CB71FF8145AA0307D512BAE
fox.wav                     5A407D4B    CA1AE7B2F839997D95B2FCDB1B54539F    528CE82153D5BE9A9E7DF2464482F75207FE98A7
fox.wma                     20F3DCFF    671D2DC6C99540DE753F7890C5A6AE48    5ADE58E55FE2B6F8DFEC20E06E38626CC68C5405
fox.wma.raw                 DD9FF7DF    521A01E027B2B4521095C62C3CF5AB69    44BA3729250FF9A988E8B9EA1E15D84FD91EE25E
fox.wma.raw.png             DD9FF7DF    521A01E027B2B4521095C62C3CF5AB69    44BA3729250FF9A988E8B9EA1E15D84FD91EE25E


WMA Lossless (again) fails to match the original checksums and it removes data at the end of the file, causing a lossy step. When I compare fox.png to fox.wma.raw.png in Hex Workshop, it spits out:
Quote
60 (0x0000003C) additional byte(s) in fox.png.
This means that WMA Lossless has stripped 60 bytes from the original file. (Same results when comparing fox.flac.raw.png to fox.wma.raw.png.)

Realizing this, I ran the same comparison on logo_plain.png and logo_plain.wma.raw.png. This time, Hex Workshop told me this:
Quote
132 (0x00000084) additional byte(s) in logo_plain.png.
That means 132 bytes removed by WMA Lossless, which would explain the graphical distortion.

There is, by the way, 120 (0x0x00000078) additional bytes in Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.exe and Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.flac.raw.exe compared to Firefox Setup 1.5.0.1.wma.raw.exe.

I argue that WMA Lossless isn't lossless. It's defect.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #1 –
Exactly what did you use to convert your wave files to wma lossless?
(Earlier I had assumed that you used Windows Media Player.)

Some things to consider:

Spectral images are meaningless (either as proof or as supporting evidence).  You need to do a sample by sample comparison.  You can either do a mix-paste in Audition or use EAC's wave compare feature.

The second part of your experiment regarding png files is totally absurd; stick with audio data.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #2 –
Not suprised  afterall its microsoft ^^

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #3 –
You're about to learn about containers and file tags I think.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #4 –
lol

how can SOMETHING have a VALUE if NOTHING EXISTS?

^^ that's a better post than what you've been blabbing about

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #5 –
Checksums on files are never always the answer! I can take an MP3 stream, toss it into an MP4 container, and guess what, both files will have different checksums. Does that mean that putting the MP3 stream in an MP4 container causes some data to get lost/added in the stream? Of course not!

Here's a simple way to test if WMA Lossless is really lossless:

Get a .wav. Call this first.wav.
Make a copy of first.wav. We'll call the copy second.wav.
Lossless encode first.wav. We'll call it first.lossless.
Now, decode first.lossless to a .wav. We'll call it third.wav.
Grab Foobar2000 and the bit-comparison plugin.
Use the bit-compare feature in Foobar2000 to bit-compare second.wav and third.wav. This will compare the audio streams, not the files.

Sure, this method isn't perfect, but it's a lot more accurate than checksumming files.
"It's the panties fault! The panties made me a pervert!"

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #6 –
Boletus, while you did decode the WMA lossless file back to PCM WAV, you should compare the actual PCM audio data and that's why you should use foobar2000's bit-compare or EAC's WAV compare. It is possible that WMA lossless doesn't store RIFF chunks or that decoding will lead to a slightly different WAV header which does not affect the actual audio data.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #7 –
Quote from: Sebastian Mares on
Boletus, while you did decode the WMA lossless file back to PCM WAV, you should compare the actual PCM audio data and that's why you should use foobar2000's bit-compare or EAC's WAV compare.
He didn't decode to .wav files, but to raw PCM. His results for his FLAC files show that he does understand what that implies.
Quote from: Boletus on
I converted the WMA-file to a raw PCM-file and used Hex Workshop to generate the PCM-file's CRC-32 and MD5 checksums (same as I've done with all files here).

The question is, what did he use to decode the WMA files. A bit for bit comparison with foobar would be unequivocal indeed.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #8 –
Quote from: skamp on
The question is, what did he use to decode the WMA files.

I agree on that. I used their official tool wmal2pcm.exe, loaded both the original wav and the one decoded from wma into Audition and saved them as raw pcm files. Then I did binary comparison, and the raw files were indentical.

That's it
If age or weaknes doe prohibyte bloudletting you must use boxing

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #9 –
My mistake was (seemingly) that I didn't look further than Adobe Audition. I used it for all the transcoding/converting, believing it wouldn't matter since I figured it would use an external encoder and decoder. Obviously, I am far from an expert on this, as written in the initial post. I appreciate the quick responses though and I've at least learned something from this.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #10 –
You might want to edit your original posting and add an "update" comment at the end, just to clear up any confusion.  Not everyone reads full threads... and misinformation travels easily.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #11 –
Quote from: grommet on
You might want to edit your original posting and add an "update" comment at the end, just to clear up any confusion.  Not everyone reads full threads... and misinformation travels easily.

Strongly seconded here.
EAC>1)fb2k>LAME3.99 -V 0 --vbr-new>WMP12 2)MAC-Extra High

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #12 –
Quote from: Boletus on
...]I think that most of you that read this know that CDs have a bitrate of 1411kbit and any truly lossless format should be able to reach that bitrate if need be...



Not really. Every lossless compressed file format will "display" a bit rate smaller than 1411 kbps if, let's say,  the original file was 16 bit 44 kHz wav file.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #13 –
Well I'll be damned!

After reading that the original poster used Adobe Audition, I tried it myself.

Taking a wave file converting to wmal and back again resulted in a file that was 44 samples shorter, but otherwise identical.  My version of Audition is 1.0.

This is very interesting indeed, but a more prudent analysis would determine exactly where the loss occurred rather than pinning it on Windows Media Lossless 9.1.  As I asked earlier, exactly what was used to do the encoding?  Combine this with what was used to do the decoding which others have been asking.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #14 –
After taking my own advice I was able to determine that Audition's encoding of the wmal file was truly lossless by decoding it with both fb2k and Winamp.

In the case of my test file, Adobe Audition 1.0 was unable to properly decode WMA Lossless.



May we have some moderation on the subject line so that it reads:

"Is WMA Lossless really lossless?"

EDIT: Now that I'm a moderator the subject has been changed.  For reference, the previous title was "WMA Lossless isn't lossless."

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #15 –
I use CoolEdit 2000, ancestor to Audition. It cannot properly decode VBR mp3. Something is always missing from the file's beginning, end, or both.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #16 –
Quote from: greynol on
As I asked earlier, exactly what was used to do the encoding?  Combine this with what was used to do the decoding which others have been asking.
I used Adobe Audition 2.0 for all the transcoding/converting. FLAC 1.1.3, most recent APE, the Ogg that comes with Adobe Audition and a special LAME-plugin, which I upgraded to use LAME 3.97.

Is WMA Lossless really lossless?

Reply #17 –
I can verify that WMA Lossless is in fact true lossless...

EAC -> WAV

WAV -> WMA Lossless (WMP) -> WAV (WMAL2PCM)
WAV -> FLAC (FLAC Frontend) -> WAV (FLAC)

CRC's and MD5 Match up...

Adobe, it seems, has a setting somewhere that causes the problem.