Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › Should I go with WMA codec?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Should I go with WMA codec? - Page 2

post #16 of 17
9/30/07 at 7:46am
Here is a very recent codec shootout @192 kbit/s
http://www.soundexpert.info/coders192.jsp
Reply
post #17 of 17
9/30/07 at 8:07am
I may be in the minority here, but I like WMA. Now Febs is way too polite to tell you that I failed a double blind test using his computer as source, but all I know is that in extended listening, I find WMA more dynamic and less fatiguing than MP3. I am not going to argue with the double blind mantra here, it clearly has some benefits and some limitations. All I know is that in real life extended listening, I have a clear preference for WMA over MP3. I have not listed to Ogg in some time, but I thought, again in extended listening that Ogg hid a bit of detail, but had a pretty cohesive musical presentation. I am undecided about ACC. Generally, I code about 200 bps regardless of the codec I am using.

I strongly suggest that you use dbpoweramp or something like it to code a few albums using a variety of codecs and do some extended listening yourself.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › Should I go with WMA codec?