I have over 20 Bruce Springsteen songs that were burned for me. Some of them were burned using MP3, and some using WMA. One thing I noticed is that with the songs that were in the WMA format, it seemed like I heard more of a dynamic range with my surround sound than I heard from the MP3 tracks. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Lloyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "PC audio discussion list. " <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 05, 2006 2:46 PM Subject: Re: Windows Media Audio
> Hi Bruce. > > Yes, as I said I've never used Flak and so was hoping the Bruce > Springsteen > example I provided may have been a track in your Flak collection that you > could have compared with the 31 meg WMA lossless. > > I have plenty of other examples if you have a Flak track you'd like to > compare, including some great Canadian musicians > Rush > and > Bryan Adams > > Basically, any rock track you have in Flak, it's likely I'll have in my > 8,000 WMA lossless collection and can let you know how much space is used > for that track. > > Regards. > > > Kevin > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bruce Toews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "PC audio discussion list. " <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> > Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 9:07 PM > Subject: Re: Windows Media Audio > > >> It's the FLAC versus WMA lossless comparison that I'd like to make. I >> understand the comparisons with lossy compression and/or with wave files. >> Thanks. >> bruce >> >> -- >> Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he >> gave the right to become children of God. John 1:12 NIV >> >> Bruce Toews >> E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net >> Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries): http://www.ogts.net >> Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com >> >> On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Kevin Lloyd wrote: >> >> > Hi Bruce. >> > >> > I've never used Flak so can't give a comparison as such but comparing > WMA >> > lossless to WAV, typically the WAV file will be encoded at around > 1,300kbps >> > whereas the WMA lossless will typically have been compressed to around >> > 900kpbs with no change to sound quality obviously. >> > >> > As an example, Bruce Springsteen's Born In The U.S.A. is approximately > 31 >> > Meg in size when encoded in WMA lossless for the 4 and a half minutes > track >> > duration. The same file ripped at 320kbps in MP3 is 11 meg in size as >> > a >> > comparison and I'd expect the WAV file to be around 35 to 40 meg. >> > >> > Regards. >> > >> > Kevin >> > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: "Bruce Toews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > To: "PC audio discussion list. " <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> >> > Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 8:53 PM >> > Subject: Re: Windows Media Audio >> > >> > >> >> What about the size of compression, how does Flac and Windows Media >> >> compare? If both are lossless, I'll go with whichever is smallest, > period. >> >> My pro-FLAC bias is based on the simple fact that it was the first >> >> lossless compression I ever saw. >> >> >> >> Bruce >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he >> >> gave the right to become children of God. John 1:12 NIV >> >> >> >> Bruce Toews >> >> E-mail and MSN/Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Radio Show and Podcast: http://www.totw.net >> >> Web Site (including info on my weekly commentaries): > http://www.ogts.net >> >> Info on the Best TV Show of All Time: http://www.cornergas.com >> >> >> >> On Tue, 4 Jul 2006, Scott Blanks wrote: >> >> >> >>> I don't often limit myself to a "me too" message, but Kevin has made >> > nothing >> >>> but good points in his post. I too have found that, when talking to >> > people >> >>> who prefer flak, more often than not they tend to be anti-microsoft, >> > rather >> >>> than for flak for a good reason. Go WMA. >> >>> >> >>> Scott >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >> >>> From: "Kevin Lloyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>> To: "PC audio discussion list. " <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> >> >>> Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 12:46 PM >> >>> Subject: Re: Windows Media Audio >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Hi Bruce. >> >>> >> >>> The obvious advantages are: >> >>> WMA is supported by many players and is probably the next most > supported >> >>> format to MP3 >> >>> WMA supports ID3 tags and so is supported by many software music >> > databases >> >>> for managing music collections >> >>> WMA can be burned directly to audio CD's because most burning >> >>> software >> >>> programs support direct conversion from WMA to CDDA - I'm not aware >> >>> of >> > any >> >>> that will do this for Flak >> >>> WMA sounds damn good - there has been some subjective discussion here > on >> > the >> >>> comparison between MP3 and WMA, some of which seems very > anti-Microsoft >> >>> based tripe rather than objective considerations and evidence based. >> > The >> >>> fact is that MP3 is the oldest encoding technology around and lacks > the >> >>> recent development that's been put into more modern encoders such as >> > WMA. >> >>> It's true that DRM is a driver for music sites to adopt WMA but you >> > can't >> >>> sell crap quality music so it would not make sense for the industry >> >>> to >> > adopt >> >>> a technology that wasn't going to provide the best quality for the > best >> > file >> >>> size. I've personally done much testing over the past 5 to 6 years > and >> > have >> >>> switched from MP3 to WMA based on the evidence of playback on my >> > computer, >> >>> on my portable player and on my Linn hi-fi. It was painful to rip my >> >>> collection all over but I can tell you that the difference in quality > is >> >>> absolutely apparent and that pain has been rewarded. >> >>> >> >>> Regards. >> >>> >> >>> Kevin >> >>> E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >> >>> From: "Bruce Toews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>> To: "PC audio discussion list. " <pc-audio@pc-audio.org> >> >>> Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 4:26 PM >> >>> Subject: RE: Windows Media Audio >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Does WMA Lossless ahve any advantage over FLAC or vice versa? >> >>> >> >>> Bruce >> >>> >> >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> PC-Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... >> >> http://www.pc-audio.org >> >> >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> >> This list is a service of MosenExplosion.com. To see what other lists > we >> > offer, visit us on the web at http://www.MosenExplosion.com >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > PC-Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... >> > http://www.pc-audio.org >> > >> > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > This list is a service of MosenExplosion.com. To see what other lists >> > we > offer, visit us on the web at http://www.MosenExplosion.com >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> PC-Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... >> http://www.pc-audio.org >> >> To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> This list is a service of MosenExplosion.com. To see what other lists we > offer, visit us on the web at http://www.MosenExplosion.com > > > _______________________________________________ > PC-Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... > http://www.pc-audio.org > > To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > This list is a service of MosenExplosion.com. To see what other lists we > offer, visit us on the web at http://www.MosenExplosion.com > _______________________________________________ PC-Audio List Help, Guidelines, Archives and more... http://www.pc-audio.org To unsubscribe from this list, send a blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This list is a service of MosenExplosion.com. To see what other lists we offer, visit us on the web at http://www.MosenExplosion.com
