Posted by dadiOH on 11/27/07 08:54

Don Pearce wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 07:48:17 -0000, Jack <jack@beanstalk.net> wrote:
>
>> I have been happy with WMA sound quality at 128 kbps (44 kHz CBR),
>> believing it to be generally cleaner than its MP3 equivalent. WMA
>> built a reputation as excelling at lower bitrates (i.e. 64 kbps)
>> and was also said to surpass MP3 at 128 kbps. To my ears, it
>> did/does have a more crystalline quality on a lot of music.
>> Subjective? Maybe. I hadn't noticed any real distortion on my good
>> quality car stereo (main usage for WMA) until the other day.
>>
>> I was stunned to hear how bad WMA 128 kbps sounds on Neil Young's
>> "Down By The River." That track has repetitive dull cymbal/brush
>> hits throughout and it's not a pristine recording to begin with.
>> Apparently the WMA (9.2) encoder treats those hits as some sort of
>> lo-res background noise. This may be compounded by distorted
>> guitar harmonics that chase along.
>>
>> At certain points the hazy cymbals fade in and out with a
>> breathing effect; an artifact nonexistent in the original WAV.
>> It's quite evident between 3:30 and 4:00 in this 9-minute song.
>> Parts of the song have crisper highs and those seem to be handled
>> OK, but it's still a disappointment.
>>
>> When you increase the WMA bitrate to 160 kbps, it seems to lose
>> this affliction, and at 192 kbps sounds close to the CD. But MP3
>> (tested with LAME & FhG) handles that track noticeably better at
>> 128 kbps. With a thousand songs encoded at WMA 128 kbps, I'm
>> rethinking formats. This slush might show up elsewhere.
>>
>> Could this be a fluke or has WMA been using tricks to sound better
>> than it really does? If anyone knows other "WMA torture tests,"
>> please post song names.
>>
>> Jack
>
> You see, what you are supposed to do at this point is post a couple
> of ten second samples - one of the original wav and one of the wma.
> That way we can do something a bit more helpful than sit here and
> say "really?".

The newsgroup name has "binary" in it? Binaries should be posted to
binary groups, not text groups. Alternatively, they can be stashed
somewhere and an URL posted.

Besides, he is asking for other *title* examples.



--

dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico

[Back to original message]