Panterachat

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

?

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

sounds swanky!

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.

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

i very badly need a motu 828mkii

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.

recording above 44.1KHz is stupid.

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

croninburg wrote: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

ATR v1.2 wrote: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.

PanteraRuleTheWorld wrote:

croninburg wrote: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.

croninburg wrote:

PanteraRuleTheWorld wrote:

croninburg wrote: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.