Is there any bitrate for a WMA that would approach the quality of an --aps LAME MP3? I have a Nomad Jukebox that supports WMA and MP3. I'm OK with having fewer albums on it. I like that WMA is gapless.

Also I've read at HA that WMA Pro files will not yet play on a WMA portable. Does that mean if I use Windows Media Player with its 2 pass VBR setting, those files will not work on my portable?

I doubt it can ever reach LAME -aps quality, at least with pre-WMA9 Pro versions.

Apparently, WMA 9 Pro is quite distinct from the original WMA (to an extent that apparently it isn't bad anymore), so it won't play with older hardware support, even 2-pass VBR. A firmware patch might change this, I guess...

~Dologan

A while back, I played around with WMA9 and came to the conclusion that it does not scale well. After 128kbps, it doesn't get much better in terms of certain artifacts (pre-echo and metallic-sounding transients were just two examples), and it certainly was tuned not by MS for the specific purpose of reaching true transparency, regardless of how high a bitrate you can choose. On a few "killer samples" that I tried, there was no point in even doing an ABX test on some of the highest settings, because artifacts like those seen at the lower bitrates had not totally disappeared. Thus, I would not recommend using WMA if you seek to get --aps-like sound quality for your portable; stick with the real thing. And, contrary to what others may be saying, I have yet to find a hardware player that plays back WMA files gaplessly. On some of my players (like the Zen), the gap was actually *longer* with WMA than it was for MP3.

I'm not sure what version of the WMA codec you'd be using, but my personal tests with WMA did not give good results. In all fairness, I believe the codec was v7 (I know it wasn't v9), but without even the need to ABX, I was able to discern 'chirping' at the maximum bitrate (160kbps). Lame @ 112kbps sounded better, FWIW.

I was looking to reduce file sizes for use on my NomadII (128mb max) and did the following: Using Microsoft Plus! Audio Converter (not part of WinXP, cost $20 or less), I converted --APS MP3 files to VBR WMAs using the 85-145 setting. The resulting files sizes were on average 38% smaller. I was satisfied with the overall sound quality, although the --APS files clearly sounded better.

WMP does not have an option to encode with a 'Pro' seeting. Only basic V9 and lossless. Any files you create using WMP (other than lossless) will work on your portable.

Now, if you use dBPoweramp to create WMA9 Professional recordings, than yes, they will not play yet on portables. You can also create standard WMA9 on dBPoweramp. We are waiting on a hopeful firmware upgrade.

Try WMA 128 VBR on your Nomad and see if you like it. You may be surprised and be able to fit much more music than LAME APS. Then again, you may not like it. Only YOU can decide.

I plan on using WMA V9 at 128VBR on my Rio Karma. Hopefully it will play gapless as I have many of the current Pearl Jam 2003 live recordings to listen to.

Hmmm.

In my ABXing, above 128k, LAME --alt-preset CBR whatever is clearly better than WMA.

--alt-preset standard starts at 128k, so for me, MP3 --alt-preset standard is the better choice.

WMA only goes up to 192k, too, so if the song needs a 320k MP3 frame, I doubt 192k WMA will do as good as --alt-preset standard, in that case.