LG VX-8300
wma vs. mp3 pros/cons
i can fit 2x as many songs on my 1gb card in wma 64 as versus mp3 128.
i was told that those bitrares are about equal in quality.
i have software ver. 02 so if the eq was an advantage it's gone now.
anybody else have any thoughts on this?
i was told that those bitrares are about equal in quality.
i have software ver. 02 so if the eq was an advantage it's gone now.
anybody else have any thoughts on this?
...
Yes, Microsoft claims that WMA sounds as good as MP3 at half the bitrate.
Double blind listening tests conducted on audio compression enthusiast sites such as www.hydrogenaudio.org have disproven this claim. In fact, in their double blind listening tests, listeners preferred MP3 to WMA at the *same* bitrate.
All of this depends to some extent upon the MP3 encoder you use. The free encoder LAME version 3.97b3 is generally considered to be the best, due to the huge amount of tuning and tweaking that has been done by people who are passionate about this kind of stuff.
All that being said, what matters ultimately is what sounds good to *you*. If you think that 64 kbps WMA sounds good, then stick with it. If you notice odd-sounding thing...
(continues)
Double blind listening tests conducted on audio compression enthusiast sites such as www.hydrogenaudio.org have disproven this claim. In fact, in their double blind listening tests, listeners preferred MP3 to WMA at the *same* bitrate.
All of this depends to some extent upon the MP3 encoder you use. The free encoder LAME version 3.97b3 is generally considered to be the best, due to the huge amount of tuning and tweaking that has been done by people who are passionate about this kind of stuff.
All that being said, what matters ultimately is what sounds good to *you*. If you think that 64 kbps WMA sounds good, then stick with it. If you notice odd-sounding thing...
(continues)
...
