Jump to content


- - - - -

MP3, WMA, WMA lossless?


40 replies to this topic

#1 jared_good

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 467 posts

Posted 28 October 2004 - 03:56 AM

MP3, Windows Media Audio, or Windows Media Audio Lossless. Microsoft says the WMA is better than MP3 but what do u think?

#2 Sinbad

    I AM NOT FOD.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5239 posts
  • Location:NY
  • Interests:Case modding, hardware, games, networks, imports, music

Posted 28 October 2004 - 04:52 AM

Obviously WMA Lossless, it's the only lossless format listed. Duh.

#3 jared_good

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 467 posts

Posted 28 October 2004 - 04:52 PM

Can anyone second that?

#4 Fod

    stupidity tax proponent

  • Retired Crew
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6834 posts

Posted 28 October 2004 - 04:54 PM

me.

having it encoded in lossless means you can decompress it to the exact waveform stored on the CD. so you can re-encode for whatever you want, without loss in quality. DO NOT re-encode mp3s.

Edited by Fod, 28 October 2004 - 04:55 PM.


#5 jared_good

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 467 posts

Posted 28 October 2004 - 11:25 PM

So its not better than mp3 audio at 320 KBPS?

Edited by jared_good, 29 October 2004 - 05:30 AM.


#6 Fod

    stupidity tax proponent

  • Retired Crew
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6834 posts

Posted 29 October 2004 - 12:38 PM

err, no.

WMA lossless is the best quality you can get. as good as CD.

#7 DangerousDave86

    Royal Family Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3085 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 29 October 2004 - 07:17 PM

MP3 @ 320Kbps is pretty damn good. But WMA Lossless as the name implies doesn't lose ANY quality when you encode it.
It's like taking a raw WAV file (which are huge and as far as I know an exact digital representation of the original analog wave recorded) and zipping it up, then when you play it back, its the exact same thing that was recorded being decompressed and played.

I think many people have tried to explain the concept to you and it's pretty simple really, the name of the format says everything.

Edited by DangerousDave86, 29 October 2004 - 07:19 PM.


#8 Relinquished

    n00b

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 15 posts

Posted 29 October 2004 - 08:52 PM

hi all i only just figured out how to use this forum and i was woundering if any one could help me by telling me how to start topics and stuff like that because i got a lot of things i need clearing up.

thanks in advance, relinquished

#9 Fod

    stupidity tax proponent

  • Retired Crew
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6834 posts

Posted 29 October 2004 - 08:55 PM

oh god. if you can't see the post new topic button in each section, i have little hope for what your posts contain.

#10 BlueScreenOfDeath

    Its just you

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3457 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Little Rock, Arkansas

Posted 29 October 2004 - 10:17 PM

lol this dont even belong here

#11 Devil McDunnough

    w00f! ^,.,^

  • Sponsors
  • 3421 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ BABY
  • Interests:Fast computers, fast cars, and fast women.

Posted 29 October 2004 - 10:56 PM

lossless format is kinda pointless unless you're riping a DVD-audio disk, which btw you can't.

192 kbps MP3 is good enough IMO. <_<

#12 Microshit

    الله

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3889 posts

Posted 29 October 2004 - 11:00 PM

yea exactly, I cant even notice the difference between a high bitrate MP3 and lossless WMA

#13 Fod

    stupidity tax proponent

  • Retired Crew
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6834 posts

Posted 29 October 2004 - 11:17 PM

it's subjective.

since he asked, "what's the best", i went with lossless, as technically, that IS the best.

and play 192kbs on a hi-fi, a good hi-fi, and you can tell the difference ;)

it's all down to what you're playing it on.

Edited by Fod, 29 October 2004 - 11:17 PM.


#14 Sinbad

    I AM NOT FOD.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5239 posts
  • Location:NY
  • Interests:Case modding, hardware, games, networks, imports, music

Posted 29 October 2004 - 11:26 PM

Eh. It depends. You can have a 192kbs file sound like shit, then again you can have one that sounds really good. Generally most release groups use VBR now, and I think it sounds better.

And umm, Serge666, why can't you rip a DVD-Audio disc? Tell that to all the DVD-Audio rips I have. :P

#15 Devil McDunnough

    w00f! ^,.,^

  • Sponsors
  • 3421 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NJ BABY
  • Interests:Fast computers, fast cars, and fast women.

Posted 30 October 2004 - 06:35 AM

Sinbad, on Oct 29 2004, 17:26, said:

Eh. It depends. You can have a 192kbs file sound like shit, then again you can have one that sounds really good. Generally most release groups use VBR now, and I think it sounds better.

And umm, Serge666, why can't you rip a DVD-Audio disc? Tell that to all the DVD-Audio rips I have. :P

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you can't directly rip DVD-Audio, you have to record the music as if you were recording live radio. So in that sense, it's not really DVD-audio anymore. ;)





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users