IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

NSTL WMA Pro listening test, MS claims test proves WMA Pro > HE-AAC
[JAZ]
post Jan 11 2006, 21:40
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 1783
Joined: 24-June 02
From: Catalunya(Spain)
Member No.: 2383



QUOTE (gameplaya15143 @ Jan 11 2006, 03:32 AM)
i think they are 'supposed' to represent a % quality.. but they are just high-to-low (or should it say low-to-lower... uh oh.. i better watch out for tos8)
*



Have you heard problems with a ~240Kbps VBR (Q98) wma 9.1 file to say it is low quality?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Woodinville
post Jan 12 2006, 01:01
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 1402
Joined: 9-January 05
From: JJ's office.
Member No.: 18957



QUOTE ([JAZ] @ Jan 11 2006, 12:40 PM)
QUOTE (gameplaya15143 @ Jan 11 2006, 03:32 AM)

i think they are 'supposed' to represent a % quality.. but they are just high-to-low (or should it say low-to-lower... uh oh.. i better watch out for tos8)
*



Have you heard problems with a ~240Kbps VBR (Q98) wma 9.1 file to say it is low quality?
*



How about this new report (DBT and all) on WMA Pro quality?

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsme...Comparison.aspx


--------------------
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Woodinville
post Jan 14 2006, 08:02
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 1402
Joined: 9-January 05
From: JJ's office.
Member No.: 18957



I must admit that I am both offended and annoyed by the various insinuations in this thread. Hence, I shall say nothing here, and await evidence of the various insinuations and suggestions.


--------------------
-----
J. D. (jj) Johnston
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Garf
post Jan 14 2006, 10:25
Post #4


Server Admin


Group: Admin
Posts: 4885
Joined: 24-September 01
Member No.: 13



QUOTE (Woodinville @ Jan 14 2006, 09:02 AM)
I must admit that I am both offended and annoyed by the various insinuations in this thread. Hence, I shall say nothing here, and await evidence of the various insinuations and suggestions.
*


I'll make 2 factual observations:

1) If I follow the test procedure, the Nero files will be 64kbps LC-AAC, not HE-AAC. In their very detailed description, they simply didn't enable HE-AAC in the settings dialog. You can easily verify this with Nero 7 (even the free demo version should work).

Edit: Since this behaviour seems to have been fixed/may not have existed in the version used, you can ignore this for the sake of argument. I'll replace it by: 1) It seems impossible to verify the test results and setup.

2) They consulted with MS how to set up WMA and got new tools that are apparently not publicly available. They didn't consult with us, and used an old version of the Nero AAC encoder.

This post has been edited by Garf: Jan 14 2006, 16:02
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Latexxx
post Jan 14 2006, 14:01
Post #5


A/V Moderator


Group: Members
Posts: 858
Joined: 12-May 03
From: Finland
Member No.: 6557



QUOTE (Garf @ Jan 14 2006, 11:25 AM)
1) If I follow the test procedure, the Nero files will be 64kbps LC-AAC, not HE-AAC. In their very detailed description, they simply didn't enable HE-AAC in the settings dialog. You can easily verify this with Nero 7 (even the free demo version should work).
*

If this is the case, somebody should contact Microsoft because they can't keep that comparison online if they know that it is completely false. Of course they could still keep it on their page but that would likely be illegel if they keep claiming that the paper proves wma's superiority to he aac.

And doesn't that mean that Microsoft's hyper super ultra new and amazing WMA 10 Pro + is only tied with lc aac instead of he aac.

This post has been edited by Latexxx: Jan 14 2006, 14:03
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jan 14 2006, 14:09
Post #6





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (Latexxx @ Jan 14 2006, 02:01 PM)
Of course they could still keep it on their page but that would likely be illegel if they keep claiming that the paper proves wma's superiority to he aac.
*

Illegal? Do you mean that results of a test shouldn't be revealed if one term of the comparison is buggy?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Latexxx
post Jan 14 2006, 14:28
Post #7


A/V Moderator


Group: Members
Posts: 858
Joined: 12-May 03
From: Finland
Member No.: 6557



QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jan 14 2006, 03:09 PM)
QUOTE (Latexxx @ Jan 14 2006, 02:01 PM)
Of course they could still keep it on their page but that would likely be illegel if they keep claiming that the paper proves wma's superiority to he aac.
*

Illegal? Do you mean that results of a test shouldn't be revealed if one term of the comparison is buggy?
*


No. But if they really have tested lc aac and know it, they can't keep lying by keeping that document publically available.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Jan 14 2006, 14:31
Post #8





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



QUOTE (Latexxx @ Jan 14 2006, 02:28 PM)
QUOTE (guruboolez @ Jan 14 2006, 03:09 PM)
QUOTE (Latexxx @ Jan 14 2006, 02:01 PM)
Of course they could still keep it on their page but that would likely be illegel if they keep claiming that the paper proves wma's superiority to he aac.
*

Illegal? Do you mean that results of a test shouldn't be revealed if one term of the comparison is buggy?
*


No. But if they really have tested lc aac and know it, they can't keep lying by keeping that document publically available.
*


I agree with you. It would be a lie. But in this case, the conducer or the laboratory has clearly set Nero to use HE-AAC. There's apparently a bug in the software, and the conducer can't be responsible of this (and can't necessary notice it while performing the test).

EDIT: emphasis in the quote

This post has been edited by guruboolez: Jan 14 2006, 14:33
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th September 2014 - 00:38