i used WMP to do that. Xmplay codes OGG and Mp3s at a high bitrate. 165 for mp3s.
Title: Title
Artist: Brain Luzietti
Album: Descent 2
Genre: game
Size: 326 KB
Updated: 3/18/2006 1:31pm
Length: 0'40"
Sampling Frequency: 44.100 kHz
Codec WMA 64 kbps
the only downside is you can't edit WMA's Music content without converting it into Mp3.
it's only cds i have done that for.
[quote=ZiNgA BuRgA]
Lol, never actually heard of TTA.
i hate wma anyway
cause of the wm part
i think it was WMP 7 or 8. on win98SE. last year lol. now it's vista with WMP 11. UT2004 is coded in 64kb/sec OGGs i didn't know that! mine codes 131 or higher.
anyway here's another one, not mine but it's a game track
Coded with a vorbis WMA Codec
Title: Rust Color (colour)
Artist: Motoi Sakuraba
Album: Star Ocean 3 OST
Genre: Game
Size: 2352 KB
Updated: 12/16/2005 11:32 PM
Length: 2'00"
Sampling Frequency: 44.100 kHz
Codec: WMA 158 kbps
or XMplay's version of it
![[Image: Proof.jpg]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v475/Ntwarr/Proof.jpg)
@Syfe
read this wikipedia entry for WMA.
link:
Wikipedia entry
some extracted quotes.
Wikipedia Wrote:Initially Microsoft claimed that files in WMA format sounded better than MP3 files at the same bitrate; Microsoft also claimed that WMA files sounded better than MP3 files at higher bitrates. However, double blind listening tests with other lossy audio codecs have consistently failed to support Microsoft's claims about its superior quality. Indeed, the first independent test (May 2004) with WMA standard encoder provided by the Windows Media 9, conducted at 128 kbps, showed that WMA was roughly equivalent to MP3 encoded with LAME encoder, inferior to AAC and Vorbis, and superior to ATRAC3 (software version) (ATRAC3plus was not evaluated in this test). WMA 10 Pro, however, starting with Windows Media Player 11, is meant to compete against the popular AAC and low bitrate aacPlus, and is clearly superior to ordinary WMA.
...
At mid-low bitrates (64 kbps or more, less than 128 kbps), latest private tests (80 kbps (July 2005), 96 kbps (August 2005) show that WMA has a lower quality than the lossy audio codecs AAC (HE and LC) and Vorbis, roughly equivalent quality to MP3, and better quality than MPC. However, it must be remembered that these tests are only individual tests and not collective tests, and also that WMA Pro is not tested.
basically all tests show that wma is only a very tiny over mp3, if at all.
unless, as stated above, u mean by wma10pro, which is a different story completely.
By the way, i have nothing against u or anything. just trying to prove my point ^.^.
Syfe Wrote:i think it was WMP 7 or 8. on win98SE. last year lol.
that cannot encode wma10pro. wma10pro is very new. ur using wma9. [also shown in ur embedded picture]
Syfe Wrote:anyway here's another one, not mine but it's a game track
Coded with a vorbis WMA Codec
...
Codec: WMA 158 kbps
ummm. vorbis WMA codec? vorbis and WMA are 2 complete different things. Vorbis is OGG, not WMA.
At a bitrate of 158kbit/s, WMA9 would still sound very good though... And the picture says 165kbit/s.
it does. but if you look at the screen of Xmplay it says "165 (VRB)" instead of 158 as my PSP does.
VBR = variable bitrate, not Vorbis.
Anyway, you have a weird bitrate for the quality level. Typically, 75% is about 100-130kbps. I guess XMplay is probably guessing wrong. My guess is that you encoded it in 90% WMA9.
Anyways, from my tests, 64kbps Vorbis isn't as good as 160kbps WMA9, so yeah, your audio will have better quality.
I dunno how to convert to WMA10pro - WMP11 doesn't seem to have the option (it added the WMA9Pro codec, but I can't find WMA10Pro)
i didn't encode it though. i got it off someone esle where they just played that one part and videoed it and then 'borrowed' the music from where they stood still for 2 minutes. it repeats fine, like where it's supposed to.