Jump to content
Light-O-Rama Forums

Opening .wma Files


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

I am going to be busy the next couple of days, but I will try to see if it is read only and I will try to rip as a mp3 file and see if that works. Thanks for the help. I'm not worried about--at least not until November!:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rick Hughes wrote:

Neither of the two files I was experimenting with are Read Only. I just sent you an email with one of the files to review.
I also got an error trying to open the file. I sent it to development to take a look. I did convert it to MP3 (which did work OK) and sent that file back to you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Dan.

I imagine the differences are nearly insignificant, but in theory, of all the formats supported by LOR (MP3, WAV, WMA) which is the best choice from a performance and audio quality standpoint?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rick Hughes wrote:

I imagine the differences are nearly insignificant, but in theory, of all the formats supported by LOR (MP3, WAV, WMA) which is the best choice from a performance and audio quality standpoint?


This is not an easy answer and other may want to voice their opinions.

With respect to efficiency, WAV is the easiest on the CPU to play but it takes up the most space on disk. I think that MP3 and WMA are probably close to the same.

Audio quality!! Well that depends on a number of things including the bit rate and others. WAV is as pure as it comes. WMA says that it uses lossless compression so in theory it is exactly the same as WAV. MP3 does lose some quality but remember this loss of quality has to be something that humans can hear before it really matters. For example if the algorithm used for compression removed 40khz sound then you will not notice it ( your dog might) but does that really matter?

If you broadcast it using an FM radio the Radio has a limit on the sound quality. As long as your audio is of better quality then FM it is OK. If you are using an average amp and speakers then they will most likely become the limiting factor and if there is background noise it may be the limiting factor... It seems from a number of different sources that when it comes to playing music through your PC that 128kbs is about the same as listening directly from the CD. Different places have said that 64-96kbs is the same as FM...

I use 128kbs for my music. By the time it gets outside with all the background noise or xmited FM. it has quality high enough and going any higher would provide no additional benefit.

The new MP3 Director uses MP3 files encode at 128kbs...

Here is a link to a good article. Note that it is only one article but I would say that the numbers I see here are consistent with a others that I have seen that were independently derived.

http://www.mp3-tech.org/tests/gb/index.html

Here was the conclusion:

Conclusion : For a computer use, the 128kbs rate produces a quality equal to an audio CD. But in the case of an MP3 use in advanced Hi-Fi, it is necessary to use a 256kbs bitrate to reach an identical result to the CD sound.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the help. When I got time, (with three kids, teaching, and a friend of my wife's and her 10 month old son over for the weekend it was hard!) I yahooed a conversion wma to wav program and got a 15 day trial version. I changed the files to wav files and they worked great. Now, I just need to determine my channels and get started!



Thanks again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...