07-12-2002, 07:01 AM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Hey pal...pass me a Corona
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,102611,tk,dn071102X,00.asp
Corona cometh! It seems like an eternity since we've seen anything new from the Windows Media group, including on the Pocket PC front, so I know something is cooking. I've seen some brief demos of Corona technology, and it's quite impressive - buffering is almost completely eliminated, even on high-quality files. They also have a very cool solution to a broken connection - it does as much caching as possible, so even if you lose your connection, it will keep playing until it runs out of content. I can only imagine what they have in store for the Pocket PC...
"Microsoft is preparing to lob its latest weapon in the digital media war, announcing Monday the beta release timing of the next version of its Windows media platform, dubbed Corona. After months of speculation, the details of Corona, including the product's official name, launch date, and additional consumer device manufacturer support, will finally be unveiled, company sources say, providing a further glimpse into the software giant's digital media strategy. Corona is the company's software engine for compressing and decoding video, and is the core of the next version of Media Player."
|
| |
|
|
|
07-12-2002, 07:18 AM
|
|
Ponderer
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 98
|
|
It will be interesting to see how the quality and file size compares with MPEG-4 - Apple is really playing up their new QuickTime successor based on it. I must say, I like the current WM formats, but industry standard does have its benefits-there are a lot more car audio MP3 players than there are WMA players.
|
| |
|
|
|
07-12-2002, 11:22 AM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 212
|
|
Im eager to see what they come out with. Id really like to see mp3 and mp3 pro support as well and would use WM more if it did. I dont care much for WMA and never have. But nevertheless itll be interesting to see what else is included.
|
| |
|
|
|
07-12-2002, 02:39 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kre
Im eager to see what they come out with. Id really like to see mp3 and mp3 pro support as well and would use WM more if it did. I dont care much for WMA and never have.
|
Well, they already support MP3 - unless you mean MP3 encoding? MP3Pro is kind of lackluster - you need a special player to have it sound good, and WMA is superior to MP3 pro in most ways. In fact WMA is superior to MP3 in almost every way - it's got a much nicer codec - but I still tend to rip everything in VBR MP3 format just for compatibility reasons... 
|
| |
|
|
|
07-12-2002, 09:07 PM
|
|
Sage
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 784
|
|
So will Corona technology only be a real advantage to those with broadband connections, or will it help out with low bandwidth connections also?
|
| |
|
|
|
07-12-2002, 11:15 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by djtipmothee
So will Corona technology only be a real advantage to those with broadband connections, or will it help out with low bandwidth connections also?
|
From what I know, the improvements in buffering and caching will be helpful on all types of connections...but it's not like it will let you watch 640 x 480 streaming video on a 28K modem. ;-)
|
| |
|
|
|
07-13-2002, 12:56 AM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 212
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jason Dunn
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kre
Im eager to see what they come out with. Id really like to see mp3 and mp3 pro support as well and would use WM more if it did. I dont care much for WMA and never have.
|
Well, they already support MP3 - unless you mean MP3 encoding? MP3Pro is kind of lackluster - you need a special player to have it sound good, and WMA is superior to MP3 pro in most ways. In fact WMA is superior to MP3 in almost every way - it's got a much nicer codec - but I still tend to rip everything in VBR MP3 format just for compatibility reasons... |
Yeah, I was referring to encoding. Word around the camp fire is that mp3pro was much better in less space. I wonder how much better WMA is in terms of actual sound quality compared to mp3. I dont spend a lot of time with WMA so I dont know the answer to this.
|
| |
|
|
|
07-13-2002, 05:56 AM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kre
Yeah, I was referring to encoding. Word around the camp fire is that mp3pro was much better in less space. I wonder how much better WMA is in terms of actual sound quality compared to mp3.
|
Give this article a read and check out the audio samples:
http://www.microsoft.com/mobile/pock...ns/wmatogo.asp
The bottom line(s)...
MP3 is the only one to support VBR
WMA has a much better psychoacoustic model than MP3, and thus sounds as good as an MP3 at double the bitrate (64 kbps WMA sounds as good as a 128 kbps MP3)
MP3Pro matches WMA for sound quality at bitrates, but it requires a special player and royalties out the wazoo. It will die.
|
| |
|
|
|
07-13-2002, 11:06 AM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 212
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jason Dunn
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kre
Yeah, I was referring to encoding. Word around the camp fire is that mp3pro was much better in less space. I wonder how much better WMA is in terms of actual sound quality compared to mp3.
|
Give this article a read and check out the audio samples:
http://www.microsoft.com/mobile/pock...ns/wmatogo.asp
The bottom line(s)...
MP3 is the only one to support VBR
WMA has a much better psychoacoustic model than MP3, and thus sounds as good as an MP3 at double the bitrate (64 kbps WMA sounds as good as a 128 kbps MP3)
MP3Pro matches WMA for sound quality at bitrates, but it requires a special player and royalties out the wazoo. It will die. |
Thanks for the link to that article. But I can now say for certain that I knew there was a reason why I didnt mess with WMA.
For myself, I never encode under 192Kbps. That Microsoft article itself points out how mp3 is the best choice for higher bit rates, such as the rate I happen to encode at and above. It states that the purpose of WMA is not for overall high sound quality, but for achieving the most out of low end bit rates. Not only that, but as you mentioned yourself, the article also states that mp3 uses VBR, which I didnt pay much attention to before, and that WMA does not. VBR does increase overall sound quality. So it looks like mp3 has been the best choice for me afterall. For me, quality is paramount. I dont care about a bigger file size... never have. So apart from trying to conserve as much file size as possible, or trying to get the most out of low bit rates, why would anyone bother? Id think most people would care more about the quality of their music than saving a few KB`s.
And youre right, I can also now see why mp3pro is useless.
To me, comparing wma to mp3 is like comparing the Sony Memory Stick to Secure Digital. Theres no comparison. Im stickin with mp3. 
|
| |
|
|
|
07-13-2002, 04:11 PM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kre
So it looks like mp3 has been the best choice for me afterall. For me, quality is paramount. I dont care about a bigger file size... never have. So apart from trying to conserve as much file size as possible, or trying to get the most out of low bit rates, why would anyone bother? Id think most people would care more about the quality of their music than saving a few KB`s.
|
Well, people like us are in the minority. :-) The average Joe can't tell the difference between an MP3 at 128 kbps and an MP3 at 256 kbps. In fact, I've done some testing with people and most people can't tell the difference between a 64 kbps WMA and a high-quality 192 kbps VBR MP3 file.
Especially with the crappy headphones that most people use, they just can't hear the differences. Since most people don't have HUGE storage cards or Microdrives, file size IS important. For the average person, WMA at 64 kbps is the best option for audio quality and file size. For audiophiles, VBR MP3 is the only choice. At least until WMA supports VBR...then it's a whole new ball game, because WMA at 160 kbps sounds as good as MP3 at 256...
I love digital audio!
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
