Since both of the transcoded files originated from lossless files and were presumably encoded with the same encoder, shouldn't they be identical?
Since WMA seems to be Windows-only for the Google music client, and WMA lossless was only recently reverse engineered, it may be that they just have your local Windows machine convert the WMA lossless files to MP3 and then upload that. Actually, looking at the about page, it seems they include LAME, libfaad, libvorbis and libflac, so it seems likely they do at least some transcoding on your local machine. I'm curious what the encoder is for the two different mp3s, perhaps one is done locally and the other remotely.
fhg I believe. Is that the encoder used for your files?
How would I check that? Is it in the metadata somewhere?
So, no one else has any thoughts? I'm still really curious how this could even happen.
Quote from: PatrickAupperle on 05 November, 2012, 12:39:40 AMHow would I check that? Is it in the metadata somewhere?foobar2000 -> right click on a song -> Properties -> Properties tab -> Toolorfoobar2000 -> right click on a song -> Properties -> <ENCODED BY>
Quote from: PatrickAupperle on 06 November, 2012, 12:35:06 PMSo, no one else has any thoughts? I'm still really curious how this could even happen.Didn't you already figure out that its transcoding some of the files on your local machine and some on the remote server?
I guess it makes sense for them to do the transcoding locally. They (and we) would save a lot of bandwidth.
Quote from: PatrickAupperle on 04 November, 2012, 10:48:20 PMI guess it makes sense for them to do the transcoding locally. They (and we) would save a lot of bandwidth.I asked their support exactly that, and they confirmed that encoding takes place on the user's machine before uploading, unless the files are MP3 which should be transferred as-is (so you can upload proper VBR files instead of insane 320 CBR files). I never asked about WMA, though.