Media Players and .wma vs .ogg

[kfluet]

I did a comparison just yesterday between WMP, PocketMind Pocket Music, WinamPAQ and Pocket MVP. I also compared .mp3, .ogg and .wma formats for file size and quality. I haven't come to a conclusion about what to use yet, but here's what I have so far:

Pocket MVP, while great for watching movies on your handheld, is terribly unstable when playing oggs as mentioned. Not worth considering for music.

Pocket Music and WinamPAQ are very similar. They have all the goodies one would expect from a music player including decent playlist editors, skins, graphic equalizers with presets for different kinds of music, etc. PocketMusic now supports .wma format (with the $20 add-on feature pack). WinamPAQ supports .ogg. For me, choosing between these two has more to do with choosing between .ogg and .wma.

Microsoft Pocket Windows Media Player has an advantage in that it comes built in to your pocketpc. Some people don't care about memory and the PIA factor in reinstalling after a hard reset. I do.

Ogg Vorbis (.ogg) and Widows Media Audio (.wma) formats beat .MP3 in quality and file size. .ogg and .wma deliver roughly half the file size vs. .mp3 for the same quality, or much better sound quality for the same file size.

For testing I encoded a number of songs from the raw CD's using XP. I encoded both .wma and .ogg files using the same variable bit rate roughly 96 kbps settings and ended up with files of almost exactly the same size.

I had a real hard time telling the difference between .wma and .ogg listening to my iPAQ with my Koss portaPro headphones. .ogg is something like 5% to 10% better than .wma, depending on the music.

Wanting better resolution and being over to my mom's for dinner, I tried plugging my iPAQ 3970 into my stepdad's audiophile quality stereo. Of course the iPAQ sounds like crap compared to a high-end CD-Player and optically coupled DAC, but my purpose was to get the best way to compare .ogg and .wma. A tube amplifier, some wicked speakers, and a properly balanced and dampened room help.

I found that .ogg format was noticeably (maybe 20%) better at the same file size (encoding rate) than .wma when listening to pop like Simon and Garfunkel, and just barely better (5-10%) when listening to orchestral or vocal classical music.

The question is what the 10% quality advantage that .ogg has over .wma is worth, especially on a PDA.

Considering the extra work needed to do .ogg instead of .wma, I think I am going to stick with .wma for now. Windows XP does a pretty good job of converting files (drop the CD in--doesn't get much easier), and from what I can see, there are more music players out there (both memory and disc based) that support .wma vs. .ogg.

Has anyone else done some real comparisons? Anybody done an .ogg vs. .wma test on PocketPC with real audio frequency analysis gear? What have you found?

I didn't see a demo version of Pocket Music feature pack to compare .wma output from Pocket Music vs. WM Player. Is there any difference?

Koss portaPro headphones kick ass as PocketPC accessory, by the way--check them out if you haven't heard them. They ain't pretty, but they fold up relatively small and the sound is incredible.

[kfluet]

I did a comparison just yesterday between WMP, PocketMind Pocket Music, WinamPAQ and Pocket MVP. I also compared .mp3, .ogg and .wma formats for file size and quality. I haven't come to a conclusion about what to use yet, but here's what I have so far:

Pocket MVP, while great for watching movies on your handheld, is terribly unstable when playing oggs as mentioned. Not worth considering for music.

Pocket Music and WinamPAQ are very similar. They have all the goodies one would expect from a music player including decent playlist editors, skins, graphic equalizers with presets for different kinds of music, etc. PocketMusic now supports .wma format (with the $20 add-on feature pack). WinamPAQ supports .ogg. For me, choosing between these two has more to do with choosing between .ogg and .wma.

Microsoft Pocket Windows Media Player has an advantage in that it comes built in to your pocketpc. Some people don't care about memory and the PIA factor in reinstalling after a hard reset. I do.

Ogg Vorbis (.ogg) and Widows Media Audio (.wma) formats beat .MP3 in quality and file size. .ogg and .wma deliver roughly half the file size vs. .mp3 for the same quality, or much better sound quality for the same file size.

For testing I encoded a number of songs from the raw CD's using XP. I encoded both .wma and .ogg files using the same variable bit rate roughly 96 kbps settings and ended up with files of almost exactly the same size.

I had a real hard time telling the difference between .wma and .ogg listening to my iPAQ with my Koss portaPro headphones. .ogg is something like 5% to 10% better than .wma, depending on the music.

Wanting better resolution and being over to my mom's for dinner, I tried plugging my iPAQ 3970 into my stepdad's audiophile quality stereo. Of course the iPAQ sounds like crap compared to a high-end CD-Player and optically coupled DAC, but my purpose was to get the best way to compare .ogg and .wma. A tube amplifier, some wicked speakers, and a properly balanced and dampened room help.

I found that .ogg format was noticeably (maybe 20%) better at the same file size (encoding rate) than .wma when listening to pop like Simon and Garfunkel, and just barely better (5-10%) when listening to orchestral or vocal classical music.

The question is what the 10% quality advantage that .ogg has over .wma is worth, especially on a PDA.

Considering the extra work needed to do .ogg instead of .wma, I think I am going to stick with .wma for now. Windows XP does a pretty good job of converting files (drop the CD in--doesn't get much easier), and from what I can see, there are more music players out there (both memory and disc based) that support .wma vs. .ogg.

Has anyone else done some real comparisons? Anybody done an .ogg vs. .wma test on PocketPC with real audio frequency analysis gear? What have you found?

I didn't see a demo version of Pocket Music feature pack to compare .wma output from Pocket Music vs. WM Player. Is there any difference?

Koss portaPro headphones kick ass as PocketPC accessory, by the way--check them out if you haven't heard them. They ain't pretty, but they fold up relatively small and the sound is incredible.

[Crystal Eitle]

I haven't done any scientific experiments (and am not likely to), but based on personal experience I reached the same conclusions that you did.

I tried .ogg, but when WinamPAQ quit working on me for no apparent reason, I switched back to Windows Media Player. WMP is more stable and easier to use and install. It has fewer features, but that doesn't bother me.

And converting files to .wma format is much quicker than converting them to .ogg, in my experience.

I've been using WMP for the past few weeks and have been pretty happy with it.

[Pat Logsdon]

Personally, I prefer Ogg for my Axim, for one reason - the bulk of my music library is in MP3 format.

If I convert MP3s to Ogg, I can't tell the difference, and file is half the size, which means I can put twice as much music on my lil' buddy.

If I convert an MP3 to WMA, it sounds like cr@p - lots of hissing and clicking.

Also, I agree with the assessment re: PocketMVP for playing Ogg files - not really worth it, and the interface is really ugly. I use WinAmpaq (with the nifty Nucleo skin) when driving w/o my GPS, and GSPlayer while using the GPS, because it uses less memory.

[TheNewSteve]

I've been thinkin' about getting the Koss earbud things.

I just don't like WMP. I like the ability in winampaq to see the playing song and the playlist in one screen, works great for car use and such or when you're listening and don't want to have to go through multiple screens just to switch songs (you have the option to browse playlists or directories in winampaq).

I know you can't adjsut the EQ in winampaq for .ogg files anyway (you can for .mp3) but in WMP i ended up with too much bass in the default (only) setting and it made a lot of songs sound like crap. They sound fine in .ogg. ( I use earbuds)


plus being able to use winamp skins is cool.

just my preference.

-Steve

[Crystal Eitle]

Originally Posted by kfluet

Koss portaPro headphones kick ass as PocketPC accessory, by the way--check them out if you haven't heard them. They ain't pretty, but they fold up relatively small and the sound is incredible.

Thanks for the tip. I just read some reviews on ePinions and it seems like people are really happy with the sound quality.

But man, are those things ugly! I don't know if I could be seen in public with these....

[Buddha]

I did several tests aswell before sticking to one format. For me the quality/size ogg gives me is what makes it my poison of choice, mp3 are too big and wma is too metallic for my taste, plus its an open format (i hate closed formats...) and I think windows media player plainly stinks on the pocketpc, WinamPAQ has everything I could wish for in a player including no screen-switching for selecting a song. Personaly I've never had ANY problems with WinamPAQ. PocketMVP rocks for playing movies but for music playing I prefer WinamPAQ.
As for the ease of making oggs, I don't think it takes me more time to make my oggs than it would to make wmas.

[kfluet]

Originally Posted by spacewaitress

But man, are those things ugly! I don't know if I could be seen in public with these....

The upper part of the speaker assembly (the part with the little switch on it) rests against your skull so that the speakers don't press too hard on your ears. The tension is adjustable. This makes them comfy for long term wear but, yes, really ugly.

The sound quality is really close to a full size over-the-ear-cup type headphone. I think big headphones look more goofy.

[kfluet]

Originally Posted by Buddha

As for the ease of making oggs, I don't think it takes me more time to make my oggs than it would to make wmas.

Using dMC Audio CD Input, part of the freeware dB Power AMP suite, it takes the time length of the CD (45min to an hour) to rip music to Ogg. I tried a different ogg capable app (can't remember which) and it took just as much time.

XP rips to .WMA in a quarter of the time if not less.

What software are you using?

[Buddha]

Originally Posted by kfluet

Using dMC Audio CD Input, part of the freeware dB Power AMP suite, it takes the time length of the CD (45min to an hour) to rip music to Ogg. I tried a different ogg capable app (can't remember which) and it took just as much time.

XP rips to .WMA in a quarter of the time if not less.

What software are you using?

I actually ment the time it takes to start the converting (the key-pressing and clicking necessary, in order to start the encoding process) :wink: This is just as quick as starting wma conversion.

I have to admit that most of the time I make oggs on my mp3-jukebox, direct from the mp3s stored on that machine but when I make 'em directly from a CD I often use 'CDex' which can rip to ogg straight away.

On average a 4 mins song takes 1m26s to encode so a full 74 minutes CD(which most albums aren't) takes about 27 minutes to encode which is isn't all that bad compared to the 45mins you mentioned.

CDex can be found here

Good Luck!

[spursdude]

So I'm going to test out the quality. Most recently I've been using VBR .wma files... around 85-90 kbps. The quality is on the most part very good - sometimes, though, it gets a bit tinny or hissy. We'll see if ogg fixes the problem, but unless it's life-changing, I'm not going to switch.

As far as I know, Windows Media Player (for PC and PPC) doesn't play .ogg files. I love WMP and it's organization on my desktop... it suits all my needs pretty much perfectly. Also, my MP3/WMA CD player won't play .ogg files. So that would moot out one of my main music players and make me unhappy at the desktop.