Skip to main content
Topic: No Love for WMA Lossless? (Read 35221 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

No Love for WMA Lossless?

Reply #75
Since right now, the direction with the larger distributors seems to be wma lossless

there is not really any "direction with the large distributors" right now, for lossless there is musicgiants selling in wmal and pretty much everyone else (many smaller outlets) selling flac.  wmal is a dead end and less likely to be supported than PlaysForOopsNevermind, wmal+drm even less so.

No Love for WMA Lossless?

Reply #76
Since right now, the direction with the larger distributors seems to be wma lossless

there is not really any "direction with the large distributors" right now, for lossless there is musicgiants selling in wmal and pretty much everyone else (many smaller outlets) selling flac.  wmal is a dead end and less likely to be supported than PlaysForOopsNevermind, wmal+drm even less so.



Except in terms of relative sales and marketing skills, Musicgiants is like Coca Cola, and all the flac sellers combined are virtually unknown to the music buying public, and without any significant marketing efforts. In prognosticating the next 10 years, I doubt it will be about what open source format is best--it will be about the bigger distributors choosing what THEY think the largest number of computer users will be able to play easily....My prediction is that this will be wma files :-)

Personally, I don't care which format wins ( as long as it is NOT DRM wrapped) ...but I do care about planning my hardware and music purchases for the future. As AV recievers [harware manufacturers]are already sporting media server abilities ( like the Pioneer elite series, among others) which utilize the windows media player standards, and play the wma files, it is looking more like Microsoft has embedded itself into your culture for quite a bit longer :-)

No Love for WMA Lossless?

Reply #77
Except in terms of relative sales and marketing skills, Musicgiants is like Coca Cola, and all the flac sellers combined are virtually unknown to the music buying public, and without any significant marketing efforts.

huh?  more like 'itunes is coca cola'.  I'd like to see some musicgiants sales numbers.  just because it's got 'giants' in the name doesn't mean anything.  you are probably not aware of all the places selling flac.  I think it's much more likely the flac market is larger than the wmal market.

Personally, I don't care which format wins ( as long as it is NOT DRM wrapped) ...but I do care about planning my hardware and music purchases for the future. As AV recievers [harware manufacturers]are already sporting media server abilities ( like the Pioneer elite series, among others) which utilize the windows media player standards, and play the wma files, it is looking more like Microsoft has embedded itself into your culture for quite a bit longer :-)

wma != wmal.  except pc software that can use MS DLLs, almost nothing else plays wmal.  those pioneer/denon/marantz/etc av media servers support flac not wmal.

No Love for WMA Lossless?

Reply #78
Why would any user wish to be tied to a particular family of operating systems using a closed source audio codec - just to be able to access their bought and paid for music?

How many portable devices support WMAL?

How does WMAL differentiate itself from other, more widely used, lossless codecs?
lossyWAV -q X -a 4 -s h -A --feedback 2 --limit 15848| FLAC -5 -e -p -b 512 -P=4096 -S-

No Love for WMA Lossless?

Reply #79
Just to reiterate...there is no way for the lossless windows media files to be converted to a compatible format and imported into iTunes that can be played via iPOD? Right?


I highly highly recommend dbPowerAMP Reference. While it isn't free it is cheap ($36). It can transcode every which way 'til Tuesday and is very efficient with a multi-core processor.

No Love for WMA Lossless?

Reply #80
Why use a proprietary codec when there's royalities-free & open source better alternatives ?

Even Mozilla has awarded a grant of $100,000 to the Wikimedia Foundation to support open codecs:

Quote
Open standards for audio and video are important because they can be used by anyone for any purpose without royalties, and can be inspected and improved by an open community.

Erik Möller,
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation

No Love for WMA Lossless?

Reply #81
Musicgiants is like Coca Cola

Now it's really funny.
1. Nobody know about Musicgiants
2. Musicgiants is available only for U.S zone (just cheked)
3. Nobody cares about WMA and even less WMAL.



No Love for WMA Lossless?

Reply #82
Wow, he's found his way here too, has he?

Why would any user wish to be tied to a particular family of operating systems using a closed source audio codec - just to be able to access their bought and paid for music?

Dunno. Seems like lunacy to me

Statistically, most people that began on PCs will stay on PCs, most that started on macs will stay on them, and the tiny little piece of the population that are programmers using linux or unix or whatever, will never be marketed to by the big Music distributors.

And open formats (such as FLAC) are ideal for PC users, Mac users and Linux/UNIX users alike, and for a variety of reasons.

No Love for WMA Lossless?

Reply #83
Off-topic discussion about subjective sound quality claims has been moved here:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....c=69556&hl=
Is 24-bit/192kHz good enough for your lo-fi vinyl, or do you need 32/384?

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019