Home of the Squeezebox™ & Transporter® network music players.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: WMA lossless

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2

    WMA lossless

    Just how good is WMA lossless? I have 600 or so CDs in this format. I have looked at other highly reccomended lossless methods. However they all seem to require that I find other files to add to them. WMA is so easy. It is there in Media Player 11 and I just rip. Easy, am I being too lazy?

  2. #2
    Senior Member funkstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    4,071
    have a look at some of the other WMA Lossless threads on here, there are quite a few.

    Does anyone know how accurate WMP is at ripping CDs? If you are really concerned about being true to the original master, EAC and FLAC are your best bet. It does take some work, to you it might not be that important, to others it is vital.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    156
    Note that EAC can rip to WMA lossless too, that will be as good as FLAC since lossless is lossless.

  4. #4
    Robin Bowes
    Guest

    WMA lossless

    johann wrote:
    > Note that EAC can rip to WMA lossless too, that will be as good as FLAC
    > since lossless is lossless.


    ....except FLAc is played natively and WMA lossless must be transcoded.

    R.


  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    111
    Use http://www.dbpoweramp.com/dmc.htm very very easy to use and convert to FLAC - IMO. Once installed install http://www.dbpoweramp.com/codec-central-flac.htm

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Robin Bowes View Post
    johann wrote:
    > Note that EAC can rip to WMA lossless too, that will be as good as FLAC
    > since lossless is lossless.


    ....except FLAc is played natively and WMA lossless must be transcoded.

    R.
    If both WMA and FLAC are losses, shouldn't there be no loss in the transcoding? If with either one you can reconstruct the original file bit for bit, why would transcoding change this? It will take more processor power, but I don't see any other downsides.

    Now, transcoding lossy formats is another matter entirely...

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    7,099
    Quote Originally Posted by bobschneider View Post
    If both WMA and FLAC are losses, shouldn't there be no loss in the transcoding? If with either one you can reconstruct the original file bit for bit, why would transcoding change this? It will take more processor power, but I don't see any other downsides.
    Downsides: no FF/REW. Also more complicated because you're running one or more other processes, so more to go wrong.

    This is a problem for some and not for others though.
    Current: SB2, Transporter, Boom (PQP3 - late beta, PQP1 - early beta), SBC (early beta), Squeezebox Radio (PB1 - early beta), Squeezebox Touch (late beta)
    Sold: SB3, Duet

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by Robin Bowes View Post
    johann wrote:
    > Note that EAC can rip to WMA lossless too, that will be as good as FLAC
    > since lossless is lossless.


    ....except FLAc is played natively and WMA lossless must be transcoded.

    R.
    And your point being?

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Lanctot View Post
    Downsides: no FF/REW. Also more complicated because you're running one or more other processes, so more to go wrong.

    This is a problem for some and not for others though.
    For use in other senses than Squeezebox, then WMA might have pros and FLAC uses and IMO, it should be considered where else in in what other formats I want to play my music.

    For instance, iTunes convert songs to Apple lossless automatically if you want to and WMA plays natively in many many devices.

    So for some WMA is better form some not.

  10. #10
    Robin Bowes
    Guest

    WMA lossless

    johann wrote:
    > Robin Bowes;181501 Wrote:
    >> johann wrote:
    >>> Note that EAC can rip to WMA lossless too, that will be as good as

    >> FLAC
    >>> since lossless is lossless.

    >> ....except FLAc is played natively and WMA lossless must be
    >> transcoded.
    >>
    >> R.

    >
    > And your point being?


    .... that your statement "WMA lossless ... as good as FLAC" does not tell
    the whole story.

    Whether or not either format is "as good as" the other depends on other
    factors.

    For use with the Squeezebox or Transporter FLAC would seem to have the
    upper-hand since it is decoded natively on the client device which means:

    1. No transcoding on the server
    2. FF/REW work
    3. Reduced bandwidth usage (assuming WMA lossless is decoded to .wav)

    R.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •