A codec "comparison" a la Microsoft:
this one will download and auto-install into your Media Player 7 or 8. It features one SQAM sample. You can listen to the original sample and to the difference between WMA/MP3/RA and the original. They claim: the less difference, the better the encoding.
http://download.microsoft.com/download/win...US/xylowin8.wmd (http://download.microsoft.com/download/winmediatech40/xylo/1/WIN98Me/EN-US/xylowin8.wmd)
They also quote a "report" on audio quality which you will find on the following URLs. Since they financed that report, of course WMA wins Well, if they had added AAC to the comparison, they had probably lost big time...
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsme...udiocompare.asp (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/compare/audiocompare.asp)
http://www.nstl.com/downloads/Final_MSAudio_Report.pdf (http://www.nstl.com/downloads/Final_MSAudio_Report.pdf)
Have fun. I'd like to hear your opinions about that Microsoft marketing
did u see the methodology they used in that test? yikes!!!!!
Originally posted by outscape
did u see the methodology they used in that test? yikes!!!!!
they probably used the worst MP3 decoder they could find
I was impressed, however, how well WMA handled the sharp attack on the SQAM test sample. It's a very typical example where an MP3 codec would switch to short blocks in order to avoid pre echo.
they probably used the worst MP3 decoder they could find
Not too far from the truth - according to the page they used WinAmp 2.10, and looking at the Winamp changelog I see this in the next version (2.20):
All new better sounding, industry standard Fraunhoffer MP3 decoder
Originally posted by cbuchner1
they probably used the worst MP3 decoder they could find
Sorry, meant to say encoder. The decoder doesn't have much influence on the audio, if it's properly implemented.