I just downloaded Windows Media Encoder Series 9 Beta from Microsoft. Anyone else tried it yet?

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsme...der/default.asp

I wonder what the different vbr options and codec choices mean. For instance, what is the difference between Bitrate VBR (Peak), Bitrate VBR, and Quality VBR. And what's the difference between the Windows Media 9 codec and the Windows Media 9 Professional codec.

Hmmm... Interesting...

not really tried for audio but when I want convert a videos the encoder crash
I have windows xp pro .

please help me I want to test the video

Microsoft sucks! But hey...we all knew that already.
Can't install the encoder because:
"You need DirectX 8.1 or higher."
I got DirectX 8.1b...

Microsoft works in mysterious ways...

There is a thread over on AVSForum where someone seems to have succeeded. You might try there.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....threadid=166874

The box said Windows95 or better so I got Linux.

Downloaded a WMA9 demo from their site and checked the MP3-encoded files with Encspot.
Guess what I found out!!!
MP3 @ 20kbps - Xing (very old) / FhG (fastenc) - Joint Stereo - 11025 Hz
MP3 @ 32kbps - Lame 3.83 - Stereo - 22050 Hz
MP3 @ 64kbps - Lame 3.83 - Stereo - 22050 Hz
MP3 @ 128kbps - Lame 3.83 - Stereo - 44100 Hz

Microsoft please use a more up to date encoder...
Lame 3.83...that's like a million years ago

You'll find the site here:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsme...eries/audio.asp

Are you telling us that:

*wma9 includes mp3 encoding
*the mp3 encoding is provided by Lame
*and so they are in violation of lgpl license by not mentionning the use of Lame?

I just recently downloaded and installed the Windows Media 9 player and encoder. So far, I've only encoded one CD audio track (Iio - Rapture) into the updated WMA9 format, using a few different quality levels. Since the WMA9 encoder is rather confusing, I'll briefly outline the steps that I took to encode:

New Session >> Convert A File >> (Browse To Input File) >> File Archive >> (Choose Desired VBR Setting)

The only quality settings that interested me were the following ones:

Highest Quality Audio (VBR 100)
Higher Quality Audio (VBR 90)
High Quality Audio (VBR 75)
Medium Quality Audio (VBR 50)

On my first test, I tried the VBR 100 setting, but found that the size of the encoded file was much too large for me. I believe the bit rate was actually above 300+ Kbps! Not surprisingly, the newly-encoded WMA file sounded identical to the original WAV file.

Next, I tried out VBR 90 setting. The size of the encoded file was more reasonable this time around, with a bit rate close to 192 Kbps. Upon listening through the file, I couldn't make out any artifacts.

After that, I tried out the VBR 75 setting. The size of the encoded file was not too large, with a bit rate of about 128 Kbps. Upon listening through the file, the quality seemed fine, but I wasn't 100% convinced that it sounded quite like the original.

Lastly, I tried out the VBR 50 setting. At first, the encoded file (with a bit rate around 80 Kbps) actually sounded pretty good. At a couple of portions in the song, however, I could make out artifacts that weren't all that hard to notice.

For all of you who plan on trying this updated format out, I suggest that you try the above four quality modes. It would be interesting to get some feedback on this. Please understand that the comments I've made shouldn't be taken too seriously, as I've only tested one track so far, and I don't consider myself to be much of an audiophile nor a person with "golden ears."

For what it's worth, I could never really stand the quality of WMA7 and 8 at low-to-medium bit rates, but with the introduction of VBR encoding, I've decided to give WMA9 a chance.

Ok, I now understand. They used lame 3.83 as a comparison for a demo.

So if you really want to compare (even if lame is not optimal for very low bitrates), here is how.

I played with GuarneriUnderground_Baglama.wav a little and found good improvments for lame with recent releases:

for 64k:
*first you could try "--alt-preset 64"
This gives results a lot better than the 64k mp3 in the demo

*for optimal results:
"--alt-preset 70 --resample 44100 --lowpass 12 --scale 1.1"

An now compare with the wma.

For 32k, I used:
"--alt-preset 35 --resample 22 --lowpass 8.5 --scale 1.1"

At 32k wma is of course better, but the file produced with the above command line is way better than in MS demo

On quality VBR you specify some quality index/percentage.

Bitrate VBR creates a VBR stream with a specified average bitrate, but with open end for bitrate allocation. E.g. a 1mbit video stream could theoretically have 20mbit peaks.

Peak Bitrate VBR is essentially VBR, except you can specify a maximum bitrate, MS did that for hardware devices that can only read a certain max bandwidth. Here you could avoid that 20mbit example I said before and tell the encoder to cap the peaks at e.g. 4mbit. This would also increase the overall quality since bits don't get unnecessary waisted on details in ultrahigh motion scenes.

Btw WME9 allows 2-pass WMA encoding, so it has the specified average bitrate. I made tests on electronica music, result are 192kbit avg streamks with 500kbit peaks (due some 'special spots' in it). Quite nice.

Here's another thread on the new video encoding:

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread....threadid=167956

hi all

who have intstalled the wma9 under win2000 OS successfully?

Although i have installed the directx8.1b which downloaded from MS homepage,
but the wma9 intaller can't pass direct media 8.1 checking.

thanks.

I found the same problem....(W2kCZ, SP3,DX8.1b)
I Need fix-it....
Welcome all replies... Thanks I need only for testing Audio Quality and multichannel capability...

Sorry for beeing unclear. But you figured it out anyway.

I've found Series 9 to be quite better than Media 8, largely due to a greater variety of settings to choose from, which includes 1 and 2-pass CBR, VBR, ABR(which is dubbed bitrate-based vbr and is 2-pass), and abr with a maximum bitrate allowable specified (also 2-pass). The sound quality is slightly better in my opinion, the degree of which depends on which of the above settings is used.

I prefer the VBR mode over anything, as I do for just about any audio encoder. With CBR, you'll generally be allocating too many bits or too few for any particular section of music. VBR is just more efficient. As Negative Zero already pointed out, the noteworthy VBR modes include:

Highest Quality Audio (VBR 100)
Higher Quality Audio (VBR 90)
High Quality Audio (VBR 75)
Medium Quality Audio (VBR 50)

The first two choices create file sizes too large for my taste. VBR 90, for example, can average over 200 Kbps. With that kind of a result, you might as well use standard with MPC or even alt preset standard with Lame. VBR 75, as it turns out, is the sweet spot for me. It's almost transparent to me, though I can sometimes hear swishy high frequency artifacts (which WMA has thus far been noted for), particularly in musical sections with constant guitar play without other instruments such as drums to hide the artifacts. VBR 75 has bitrates mostly in the 128 to 160 range, hovering mostly on the lower end.

For anyone interested on quickly setting up EAC to use Windows Media Encoder Series 9 as the external compressor, here's the info:

Choose "User Defined Encoder" as the parameter passing scheme. Then enter "wma" as the file extension to use. Browse to and select "cscript.exe" as the application, which is in the Windows folder (mine was specifically in the System32 subdirectory). Under additional command line options, type:

"c:\program files\wm9enc\wmcmd.vbs" -input %s -output %d -a_mode 2 -a_setting Q75_44_2

The path to the wmcmd.vbs file above is where I told Windows Media Encoder Series 9 to install, which is different from the default option. Make sure you modify the path to match your choice during installation, if different from the default.

Lastly, under EAC Options/Tools, make sure "Do not open external compressor window" is UNCHECKED. This is importmant! For me, the encoder would not complete encoding properly after ripping the WAV if the box was checked.

You can alter the -a_setting switch to adjust the VBR quality. You can easily change between the following:

Q98_44_2
Q98_48_2
Q90_44_2
Q90_48_2
Q75_44_2
Q50_44_2
Q25_44_2
Q10_44_2

Note that these settings are slightly different from the ones available using the Windows Media Encoder GUI application.

WMA9 using VBR 75 will probably remain as my audio encoder mode of choice for general listening (at least until Ogg Vorbis gains greater widespread hardware vendor support). I encourage everyone to give Windows Media Encoder Series 9 a spin and offer your comments/criticisms to this thread.

Interesting... will those two last settings roughly result in 64 kbps and 32 kbps bitrates/file sizes?

What about this "DirectX 8.1b in need" thing - so probably I won't be able to use only the command line encoder under plain Win95?

As far as I know by now, WMA9 has been used in the c't listening test (probably not with VBR). At least they say so on their website, but the printed issue with all results (hopefully giving all encoder versions and settings) will come out tomorrow. I rated WMA as second best with 64 kpbs, right behind my "personal winner" AAC (see the thread in that forum, http://www.audio-illumination.org/forums/i...edb226db437f3a) which might have been the Fraunhofer one without Spectral Band Replication (I read that in de.comp.audio).

I have Windows 98 original edition, with DirectX8.1b, and the encoder installer keeps telling me I need WinME or Win2000.

Windows Media 9 is useless, a waste of 9MB of hard drive space.

i would like to see Ogg vorbis compared to WMA9.

Then read the thread I mentioned...;-) or the new one about the results of the c't listening tests, because WMA9 took part there together with Ogg Vorbis 1.0 and an evaluation version of FhG AAC not yet available to the public.

If you check the system requirements for the Player, it needs 98SE, or better and the Encoder needs 2000 or XP. I use 2000, SP3, DirectX8.1 and they loaded and run with no problems.

Thanks, so bad news for me... I was able to use WMA8's command line encoder with a freeware GUI on my Win95B, though. OK, my "codec of choice" seems to become AAC anyhow, so who cares... B)

http://www.mp3-tech.org/tests/wma9/index.html

Just because I was upset

Good one!
Let the people know!

If you ask me, it's just VERY stupid to pointlessly and so badly limit a media format to certain platforms. M$ did it badly enough with Windows Media up to version eight, but this is just ridiculous.

I got same configuration and installer no finish...W2k Sp3,DX8.1 ,IE6, Tested in two PCs PIII-700MHz (in work) and (home) Athlon XP 1800+.

Why?WM9Player is instaled O.K.

David

So where do I download for linux? (joking....)

Okay, I know this an old thread but I want to thank Skythus for his posting. I have seen this thread acknowledged in several other forums. I have done testing with WMA 9, vbr, quality 90. The file takes up approximately the same space as lame with --alt preset extreme. The WMA sounds very good. The gap issues with MP3 seem to not be a problem with WMA 9. Portables play it. I'm not an M$ fan, but it works. I'm rooting for Ogg, but in the meantime...Thanks again Skythus