Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: No Wma? (Read 16502 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

No Wma?

Reply #50 –
Quote
Especially, if you say something against the dogma that is in wide circulation. Since I can easily prove this with less than 2 megs, here goes: Lame 256 IS NOT and has NEVER BEEN CD[perfect] Quality.
...
Now go ahead and call me a troll or idiot.   But if you do this, it is obvious (unless winamp re eq issue.), and you can only scratch ones head and ask "are they doing test on speakers or headphones? Lame 256 is NOT cd perfect.

LOL, well it's good that you are writing this in off-topic forum, because you couldn't be more way off.

Nobody here says MP3 is CD-quality, and if somebody does, he/she is proven wrong. You could use even a little bit time for reading the forum first.. 
Honestly I don't wonder if some people think you are trolling. If you don't find out even the most basic stuff here, and claim these things like this forum would favor the idea that Lame-320kbps would be CD-quality, which probably anybody who has read this board for day or two can notice is something this forum does not do rather just the opposite, so you just simply ridicule yourself..
What comes to "pops" as Lame artifact, I think those are more like from ripping or clipping artifacts (probably because you amplified mp3s too much.)

I'm sorry if you find the forum unfriendly, but honestly, I think you have pretty big part in creation of that impression for yourself.
Juha Laaksonheimo

No Wma?

Reply #51 –
1. what portable players support mp4?  No I haven't yet seen any and too lazy to goggle (being invested in iriver).

As far as flex goes (as per other man's post), I know with mp3, more variable bit rate distribution did seem (emphasis on word) to make stuff sound better at moderate bit rates.  If you don't believe me get a bit rate anaylysis program (one is free, but cant think of name) and play with lame settings and frauhoffer (for a day or more.)

Indeed I would lean toward mpc, but likely by the time the portable will be able to do them, in 2 years, ogg will be as good.  For now it is almost.

No one can hurt ogg--exactly-- because it is not making a profit.  Yet, ogg popularity can be hurt; the value of its developers time can be hurt; its status as a standard; and the extent it is useful to encode.  For a file that is not compatible with other people (sharing), nor compatible in the widest range of players (not talking computers), is hurting Ogg.

Total ogg success would the supplanting of mp4.  I do believe that either mp4 or ogg will become the standard.  And the other will be forgotton and not supported by portables 20 years hence. (you get older you will appreciate this. As do 8 track users, which I cannot find to buy.)  As the main format then will be Ogg V x or MpX.  With only a trace legacy memory of the best known former formats.

As to which will effectively die and which will live, I don't know. I wouldn't relax.  Now is a time of decision. 

I don't believe things, because I want to believe them.  At least I try not, though I am only human.  (She couldn't only love me for my money.)

No Wma?

Reply #52 –
>What comes to "pops"

Again, my strong hint to developers and testors.  Do not use simple DDD test files. AAAD is best.

Pops and click were native on AAAD material popular pre 1988.  They can be removed through filter and Noise reduction. Modestly, for introduction of artifacts.  But it is amazing what can be done without manually tweaking anything.  I am not sure the native pops would be considered artifacts, short of they could be manually interpolated out.

No Wma?

Reply #53 –
Quote
As far as flex goes (as per other man's post), I know with mp3, more variable bit rate distribution did seem (emphasis on word) to make stuff sound better at moderate bit rates.  If you don't believe me get a bit rate anaylysis program (one is free, but cant think of name) and play with lame settings and frauhoffer (for a day or more.)

MP3 vbr's flex does not necessary mean it provides better quality. It can fail pretty often if not properly tweaked.
If you think the fact that mp3 vbr can hit suddenly high bitrates, when other codecs don't, you are wrong to assume that mp3 vbr is better.
This is especially so if there's lots of high frequency content in the sample being encoded. MP3 has practically a design flaw, which often leads mp3 vbr to bloat the bitrate in cases when it wouldn't be psychoacoustically needed. In other cases mp3 can fail easily. Flex in mp3 vbr is no guarantee of quality.

Below I've linked the message where I explain the sfb21 issue of mp3, which can lead to bloating of bitrate which may give you this false sense of security, when infact mp3 vbr can easily fail in other cases (like happen often with --r3mix)

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....&st=0#entry6562
Juha Laaksonheimo

No Wma?

Reply #54 –
OK.. to me it seems you don't care to read this forum at all nor answer questions, only those you "think" you have good answers to.
Example to unwillingness to search: "what portable players support mp4? No I haven't yet seen any and too lazy to goggle (being invested in iriver)"

Quote
I do believe that either mp4 or ogg will become the standard. And the other will be forgotton and not supported by portables 20 years hence

I don't think there will really be a standard, and nothing will be forgotten. Now that MPC, AAC, and OGG offer high quality lossy audio compression, people will have relatively much more choise, and none is actually a bad choise. Each format has different artifacts. for example, MPC is bad at low bitrates currently, Ogg is great at low bitrates, and has allaround good quality (but still pre-echo), AAC is good at almost all bitrates (not really at low, but AAC+ will fix that) but has artifacts such as quite noticable pre-echo. (this is all subjective..)
AAC has tough licensing that will keep many away from it. OGG is totally completely free, many love and will love this. MPC too doesn't really have a problem with being free. As said in one of the forums (i read the forums..) proprietry patents that MPC uses will soon expire.

I "don't buy" the "standard" talk or "this is the codec of the future"..

Anyway, i don't think i should comment on anything more. I suggest you to read the forums, much knowlage can be gained.

No Wma?

Reply #55 –
>I don't think there will really be a standard, and nothing will be forgotten.

This is possible.  Hopefully probable. As ic chips get cheaper, smarter, more memory.  Just as long as too many formats don't keep sprouting up, and cost to feature ratio issues...Not to mention the desicion maker must be familiar with a format to bother to include it.  (Parallel to the Opera v IE battle.)

I only see flash mp4 players on google.  Which is good for ogg. I don't consider flash portable having an appeal to people that consider music permanent.  Though you look sexier with a flash player, than a joggable cd/mp3 player.

No Wma?

Reply #56 –
degarb - do you realize at all that people are talking to you? Instead of perhaps reacting to the criticism you've received from several users and responding to the arguments put forward by them, you just go on blabbing about a totally different subject. Trying to speak to you is like talking to a wall.


Quote
>What comes to "pops"

Again, my strong hint to developers and testors. Do not use simple DDD test files. AAAD is best.


Ahahahaha.

No Wma?

Reply #57 –
degarb:

Stop trolling.  I'm not going to warn you again.  If you are going to make claims about other peoples intentions or their actions (or make sweeping generalizations in a hostile manner), then you had best back up your claims with solid evidence and reason.  If you are going to make inflammatory claims about something audio related, do the same.

Slagging off Hydrogenaudio or it's users for no reason is unacceptable, especially when it's off topic.  Hydrogenaudio isn't your personal playground for ranting or otherwise carrying on about nonsense just to get a rise out of people.  Use of this forum is a privilege, not a right.  It's a privilege that will be taken away from people who are unable to converse in a reasonable manner or who are unable to follow the rules.

If you want to continue to be a member here, I suggest that you change your attitude drastically.  So far I haven't seen you contribute anything worthwhile to the forums here, instead all you do is disrupt things.  Either change this, or leave.

No Wma?

Reply #58 –
Has anyone played wma files on their rio/iriver?  Transparent mode?

No Wma?

Reply #59 –
Quote:
Volcano
Posted: Oct 19 2002 - 03:35 PM


Senior Member


Group: Members
Posts: 316
Member No.: 112
Joined: 30- September 01



degarb - do you realize at all that people are talking to you? Instead of perhaps reacting to the criticism
you've received from several users and responding to the arguments put forward by them, you just go on blabbing about a totally different subject. Trying to speak to you is like talking to a wall.

QUOTE

>What comes to "pops"




Again, my strong hint to developers and testors. Do not use simple DDD test files. AAAD is best.



Ahahahaha.

You don't really expect people to take you seriously if you talk such *unbelievable* crap, do you...? (Apart from that, you took JohnVs sentence totally out of context, again your comment had absolutely nothing to do with what he was saying...)


Actually, I think I'm making a right fool of myself, wasting my time on you...


    ________________


This type of post added NOTHING to encoding conversation.  Was a pure attack without even making a single point.  Anyone posting such a direct attack has the maturity level of teenager, if that.

Try too keep comments more productive. 

Back to encoding.  Yes, LPs can be cleaned up to cd quality.  Yes, encoding them is going to be harder than a pretty wav file because the remaining dirt must be encoded as well as the original signal.  The beauty is the answer to the question : " Can the encoder handle the stress properly."

Unfortunately, the drift is way off wma due to ogg fervor. 

Which brings me to a question: I will not install media player.  So is there away to encode wavs to wma9 via eac or cdex? 

And no I have never tested wma and dirty wavs.


However, this very wma question shall bring a flurry of wma hate posts; I will be called an idiot.  And so this board goes.

No Wma?

Reply #60 –
Degarb:

I warned you.

Bye bye.

No Wma?

Reply #61 –
Wow. 2nd ban in HA's story.

No Wma?

Reply #62 –
Time to close this thread?
It's wasted enough of my time