Hydrogenaudio Forums > WMA 8 @192kBps: Question

Hydrogenaudio Forums > Lossy Audio Compression > Other Lossy Codecs

Kas

Jul 28 2002, 12:26

Hey all. . . :crystal:

I've been ghosting these boards for about a month now and I realize that asking a WMA 8 question will probably put me on the wrong side of the tracks with most people here

, but I have a question about WMA 8 @ 192k:

» it's a Microsoft product, but I haven't run across much technical analysis with the higher end WMA bit-rates.

Any help would be great. Thanks for your time and thoughts.

spoon

Jul 28 2002, 14:21

I have been known to defend WMA when it comes to low bitrates for existing portable mp3/wma players, but for high bit rates - Lame at 320Kbps on most music should give indistinguishable results to an original CD (all things being equal). I also think the majority of people could detect a 196Kbps WMA file as being WMA...

Not scientific, I know.

SNYder

Jul 28 2002, 14:35

wma 8? LOL

seriously though... I'd choose -alt-preset standard over wma at it's highest bitrate anyday. It was made for lowbitrates and lowbitrates only. And even at 64kbps, I'd rather go with OGG which I think KILLS wma.

wma 8 is worthless now.

wma 9 on the other hand sounds promising... can't wait to try that sucka out. hope it doesn't suck.

Kas

Jul 28 2002, 18:12

Hmmmm....

mithrandir

Jul 28 2002, 22:05

I'd use LAME simply because it is more stable and certain than WMA8. LAME --aps has been specially tuned to handle some normally difficult samples. And let's face it, MP3 is completely ubiquitous; not so for WMA.

Kas

Jul 29 2002, 19:13

Cool. Thanks for all the replies.

Does anyone know of a WMA forum where I might get some answers to my technical questions (where frequencies cut off)?

Thanks.

Dibrom

Jul 29 2002, 19:39

QUOTE
Originally posted by SNYder
wma 9 on the other hand sounds promising... can't wait to try that sucka out. hope it doesn't suck.

I tried WMA9 on one of the test samples ff123 provided. Thear I think it was. Anyway, it sounded a good deal worse than whatever version was used in the test (both via WMP and Winamp)... heh. I wouldn't get my hopes up if I were you.

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.