IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
WMA 192 kbps vs WMA VBR 240-355 kbps
lvqcl
post Oct 18 2010, 21:19
Post #26





Group: Developer
Posts: 3411
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



WMA Q98 file was uploaded to the same thread.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Oct 18 2010, 21:40
Post #27





Group: Members
Posts: 5045
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (pdq @ Oct 17 2010, 19:15) *
QUOTE (saratoga @ Oct 17 2010, 13:32) *
WMA Standard supports 24 bit audio FWIW. No idea if the MS encoder is particularly good at it (probably makes no difference anyway).

I have no idea what you mean by that,


I mean the decoders can output 24 bit samples, same as WMA Pro.

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
kode54
post Oct 18 2010, 21:52
Post #28





Group: Admin
Posts: 4626
Joined: 15-December 02
Member No.: 4082



Which is rather silly, since the decoders themselves produce floating point samples internally, then quantize to 16 or 24 bit PCM in the output stage. Of course, that's less destructive to the signal than the actual encoding process was in the first place, so I guess there's really no point in making that distinction.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
hellokeith
post Oct 20 2010, 09:35
Post #29





Group: Members
Posts: 288
Joined: 14-August 06
Member No.: 34027



QUOTE (lvqcl @ Oct 18 2010, 15:19) *
WMA Q98 file was uploaded to the same thread.


That's whacky Lvqcl.

So the issue is 9.2 vs 9. I can encode to WMA STD 9 on an XP box just fine, but the other XP box that is all updated encodes to 9.2 and munges the file. dry.gif
Oh well, I use peak vbr 2-pass w/o issue, so no worries for me. rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
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: 22nd October 2014 - 23:25