Does anyone use wma pro?

[S]

Windows Media Audio 9 Professional (WMA Pro) is a high-performance codec that delivers better-than-CD resolutions and is designed for audiences that use high-fidelity hardware and 5.1 channel surround sound-equipped computers. It captures full-resolution 24-bit/96 kHz audio in stereo, 5.1 channel, or even 7.1 channel surround sound for streaming, progressive download, or download-and-play delivery at 128 to 768 Kbps.

In addition, the WMA Pro codec family will soon be enhanced to optimize for wireless scenarios. A new WMA Pro profile will extend the range of WMA Pro to lower bit rates and will offer superior quality and efficiency at 24 Kbps to 96 Kbps for stereo, and 128 Kbps to 256 Kbps for 5.1-channel sound. This high-efficiency encoding is ideal for wireless delivery and playback, or for Internet delivery over low-bandwidth connections. For more information about the low-bit rate technology in WMA Pro and how it compares to other audio codecs, see the NSTL Test Report.

When using 5.1 surround sound audio compressed at 384 Kbps with WMA Pro, most listeners cannot discern any differences between the compressed music and the original pulse code modulation (PCM) files. WMA Pro also offers dynamic range control using the maximum and average audio amplitudes that are calculated during the encoding process. Using the Quiet Mode feature in Windows Media Player 9 and later, users can hear either the full dynamic range, a medium difference range up to 12 decibels (dB) above the average, or a little difference range up to 6 dB above the average.

If a user tries to play back a file that was encoded using the 5.1 channel, 24-bit, 96 kHz sampling capabilities, but does not have a system or sound card that supports multi-channel or high-resolution sound, multiple channels are combined into stereo audio (for example, 16-bit, two channel audio), ensuring that users get the best playback experience their systems can provide.

The following table compares WMA Pro to competing compression technology.

Audio Data Industry Compression* Windows Media* Compression Savings
2 ch x 48 kHz x 16 bits
Dolby Digital 2.0 at 220 Kbps
WMA Pro at 128 Kbps
1.7:1

6 ch x 48 kHz x 20 bits
Dolby Digital 5.1 at 384 Kbps
WMA Pro at 192–256 Kbps
1.5–2:1

6 ch x 48 kHz x 24 bits
DTS 5.1 at 1,536 Kbps
WMA Pro at 768 Kbps
2:1

?

[S]

here's a link for the audioheads

http://studio-central.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=3318

and read all of this http://www.tweakheadz.com/16_vs_24_bit_audio.htm

[PanteraRuleTheWorld]

sounds swanky!

[S]

though if the source is recorded at less than 24/96, encoding in wmapro in pointless eh? reading has made me realize that recording in as high a resolution as possible is worth it, because each after-process you run degrades the quality, and when you finally burn down to 44.1/16bit you won't lose as much as you would if you recorded at 44/16 and ran your processes from there.

[Gnarkiller]

Yeah if you run it through at the get go itr ends up bett. use a synchronizing process

[S]

i very badly need a motu 828mkii

[ATR v1.2]

always record in the highest possible resoultion, with the highest sampling rate.

then again dark side of the moon was recorded analog and you wont show me many modern digital recordings that actually sound that much better.

[Metallash]

recording above 44.1KHz is stupid.

[S]

Having said that, imho there are two good argument for higher sampling rate. The first one is harmonic, and the second one is getting rid of that brickwall filter.

If you have a 14kHz signal, the 2nd harmonic would be at 28kHz, which is beyond what any of us can hear. But, there's another kind of harmonic. If there are two signal, one 19kHz and the other 20kHz, there will be a harmonic at the difference in freq ... namely at 1kHz. Now if there are signals at 30kHz at 35kHz (ultrasonic) ... you will have a harmonic at 5kHz which is well within our hearing threshold.

As for the brickwall filter, well it's a long story Basically it causes pre- and post-ringing to the signal. Would you belief that if you see a digital signal on an oscilloscope, you can also see that the signal rings before the "proper" signal? Getting rid of the brickwall filter cleans the signal response.

In a 44.1kHz system we need to implement brickwall at 22.05kHz to prevent the signal from "bouncing" at 44.1kHz. Now with a 96kHz sampling rate, we can get rid of that brickwall filter and use a much gentler curve for the filter. (Note that there are gentle-curve filter for 44/16 out there like Wadia's DigiMaster)

Another interesting thing is, if in the end you're going to convert back to 44.1kHz, it might make more sense to record at 88.2kHz rather than at 96kHz because the downsampling is much more straightforward.

[croninburg]

You're deluding yourself if you think your ears can detect such subtleties. You've been to rock shows. Your ears are fucked.

[PanteraRuleTheWorld]

You're deluding yourself if you think your ears can detect such subtleties. You've been to rock shows. Your ears are fucked.

can make a difference through good quality headphones

[S]

always record in the highest possible resoultion, with the highest sampling rate.

then again dark side of the moon was recorded analog and you wont show me many modern digital recordings that actually sound that much better.

digital will never sound better than analog recording. see black album.

[croninburg]

You're deluding yourself if you think your ears can detect such subtleties. You've been to rock shows. Your ears are fucked.

can make a difference through good quality headphones

I wouldn't know about that. My speaker set up is minimal.

[PanteraRuleTheWorld]

You're deluding yourself if you think your ears can detect such subtleties. You've been to rock shows. Your ears are fucked.

can make a difference through good quality headphones

I wouldn't know about that. My speaker set up is minimal.

my speakers are shit, but through headphones you can notice the difference. I uploaded some shit at a lower quality to save space and the cymbols and high end guitar sound tinny, ruins the song.