Skip to main content


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: WMA9, any test done? (Read 2142 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

WMA9, any test done?

WMA 9 is much better than WMA 8 (for me), no more over brightness at mid/high bitrates!
  WMA 9 Professional is even better in handling high-end frequency than WMA 9 . But WMA 9 Pro has more artifacts than WMA 9. WMA 9 Pro seems to handle super sharp attacks better than Ogg at 128 kbps! Although WMA 9 Pro sharp attacks is different from the original, but it is still much better than Ogg "Watery" attack at 128 kbps!

  Am I right with my test? Anyone please?

Codec & Settings

OGG 128 kbps  = -q 4.5
WMA 9 Pro 128 kbps = Windows Media Audio 9 Professional, 128 kbps, 88 kHz, 2 channel, 24 bit

SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2021