what exactly are wma files? What kind of format is this?? is it lossy?

It stands for Windows Media Audio. If I am not mistaken, these are compressed audio files developed my Microsoft, a competitior to Apple's AAC format.

ok so are they lossy?

Yes they are lossy, just like MP3s.

They are lossy, but I've read that they're better than mp3s at an equal bit rate. I compared frequency analysis graphs once, & whereas mp3s cut off @ 16kh wmas cut off @ 19kh so you get a lot more highs which is where the harmonics are.

well hell......I had downloaded a couple of shows in mp3 format......and when they were posted as wma's I thought (hoped) maybe I was getting an upgrade to a lossless format.....

wma's they are file for blondies

kream Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wma's they are file for blondies

Maybe I need to dye my hair! I'm a brunette, but I can't get them to play on my Windows Media Player (Version 11). : (

I've reinstalled the WMP, made sure the file format was checked, and still I get nothing but hiss.

Do I need to install something additional? Many thanks for whatever suggestions you may have.

That's strange sweetladyjane I'm playing them right now in WMPlayer 10, everything's fine.

I suggested this in another thread, my default player is Winamp, it's freeware, the 'basic' version is all you need, it plays virtually all types. It's lightweight on your computor, no adware or malware. Just do a google for the latest version.

I tend to ditch microsoft stuff & find alternatives

vox12string Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That's strange sweetladyjane I'm playing them
> right now in WMPlayer 10, everything's fine.
>
> I suggested this in another thread, my default
> player is Winamp, it's freeware, the 'basic'
> version is all you need, it plays virtually all
> types. It's lightweight on your computor, no
> adware or malware. Just do a google for the latest
> version.
>
> I tend to ditch microsoft stuff & find
> alternatives


Hi vox12string.

I responded to your suggestion in the Chicago Aragon thread. I did download Winamp and the files played just fine, which made me happy. Thank you for that suggestion!

However, since I'm not familiar with everything I can do with Winamp and I've gotten used to using the MS Media Player, I thought I'd try to stick with that for the majority of my needs... (but I'm still open-minded about using Winamp if I can't resolve this issue).

I'm just one of these people who likes to figure out why something doesn't work and fix it. I haven't had much success just yet.

They're a pain in the ass.

...has anyone run a frequency analysis...??? Cos I did...

from Hand Of Fate (Aragon matrix):
FLAC:


WMA: (256kb/s 24bit pro)


MP3: (256kb/s mpeg-3)


Please don't 'asume' that women (no matter what hair color) can't handle technic stuff...or don't know what they're talking about...
especially when that, in this case 'blond/red' woman can mix to sources together and LOVES Stones music...LOL

All said and done...I'll vote for FLAC but I started posting wma's here because the files are smaller than FLAC but maintain higher quality than mp3 (i.m.h.o.)...and are good for burning a gap-less CD (which is the idea of my remasters)...
I never play wma's on my computer so I can't advice anybody on that. I only know that with NERO burning programm (which is pretty common I thought...) you can burn gap-less CD's...that CD can be ripped to anything...

But I'm not gonna waste my breath arguing about mp3 vs wma...milions of internet pages are written about it. Bottomline to me is that FLAC's are perfect...

Also from all the people that have downloaded my wma's, just a few have complains or troubles playing them in WMP...I'll look for other ways of making wma's or I might just be uploading only flacs...I just don't know...
uploading mp3's other than 1 or 2 tracks are not an option for me...

Having that said...I suppose gold rings on you all...because Keith has said that...so...who am I to argue...

"...I said we...we are heaven bound..."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-01-14 22:24 by rubycatgirl.

kream Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wma's they are file for blondies

rubycatgirl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ...has anyone run a frequency analysis...??? Cos I
> did...
>
> from Hand Of Fate (Aragon matrix):
> FLAC:
> [img233.imageshack.us]
> .jpg
>
> WMA: (256kb/s 24bit pro)
> [img233.imageshack.us].
> jpg
>
> MP3: (256kb/s mpeg-3)
> [img74.imageshack.us]
> g
>
> Please don't 'asume' that women (no matter what
> hair color) can't handle technic stuff...or don't
> know what they're talking about...
> especially when that, in this case 'blond/red'
> woman can mix to sources together and LOVES Stones
> music...LOL
>
> All said and done...I'll vote for FLAC but I
> started posting wma's here because the files are
> smaller than FLAC but maintain higher quality than
> mp3 (i.m.h.o.)...and are good for burning a
> gap-less CD (which is the idea of my
> remasters)...
> I never play wma's on my computer so I can't
> advice anybody on that. I only know that with NERO
> burning programm (which is pretty common I
> thought...) you can burn gap-less CD's...that CD
> can be ripped to anything...
>
> But I'm not gonna waste my breath arguing about
> mp3 vs wma...milions of internet pages are written
> about it. Bottomline to me is that FLAC's are
> perfect...
>
> Also from all the people that have downloaded my
> wma's, just a few have complains or troubles
> playing them in WMP...I'll look for other ways of
> making wma's or I might just be uploading only
> flacs...I just don't know...
> uploading mp3's other than 1 or 2 tracks are not
> an option for me...
>
> Having that said...I suppose gold rings on you
> all...because Keith has said that...so...who am I
> to argue...
>
> "...I said we...we are heaven bound..."


your frequency analisis look great. now i'm sure you are not blonde. you have to be smart (rubycat)girl

rubycatgirl: one question please about yr mp3 comparison

did you converted from waw to mp3 or to mp3pro with Nero ? it seems to be mp3pro to me.., may be not


sweetladyjane: maybe the problem it's with the copyrights protection capabilities inside the wma songs AND WMP11, this is the worst problem of sharing with wma songs, you never know if them will play or not for you..
It happend to me trying to listen the song and the WMP connecting to microsoft site asking to buy the license of the song...
So no more WMP for me, the same with ipod formats, sony formats etc etc,; mp3 its free and OPEN format, the same Flac, etc.
I employ Winamp for ALL the audio formats, and WMP classic version 6.4.9.0 with K-Lite Mega Pack codecs for all the audio and video formats.

Here's the frequency analysis I did a while back to prove some point or other & you can see clearly that the wma's go higher but notice how the waveform is smoother, that looks to me like audio compression (as opposed to file compression).

Yes, I prefer wma's to mp3s in the gapless burning of cds, no frames being added to the files, altho I've got to where I can edit out the gaps on one cd in about 10 minutes.

I'll accept whatever's available, I have a modest stereo which doesn't show up the difference between the various formats to that great extent, & given my almost 57 year old ears, there's not much point in upgrading so compressed formats are fine by me.

pancho1111 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> rubycatgirl: one question please about yr mp3
> comparison
>
> did you converted from waw to mp3 or to
> mp3pro with Nero ? it seems to be mp3pro to me..,
> may be not
>


I converted with Easy CD/DA extractor...

...and all I wanted to say is that wma's have a good side too...and not every wma is the same...and that goes for mp3 as well...and bread...and wine...and you name it...!

But your right...wma is designed for 'licence'

...it's only a matter of time before the file size is not a problem anymore...for anyone...

vox12string Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

(...) no frames being added to the files, altho
> I've got to where I can edit out the gaps on one
> cd in about 10 minutes...(...)
>
...I do exactly the same...LOL ...