WMA vs MP3
I decided one night to make a. wma file to see what Microsoft was boasting about. The file size was super small, WAY smaller than your average MP3 and sounded just as good. I'm considering converting my MP3 collection to.
I decided one night to make a .wma file to see what Microsoft was boasting about. The file size was super small, WAY smaller than your average MP3 and sounded just as good. I'm considering converting my MP3 collection to .wma since it would take up less than half the space. Anybody here prefer .wma over .mp3? I was pretty surprised at the sound quality vs. file size. If Microsoft came out with the technology earlier, I could definately see .wma being mainstream and not .mp3.
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
my problem between the two is i dont like windows media player at all. And, my hard drive space ISNT limited at all. I use lame and EAC to rip to mp3, so the quality is excellent.
I have a feeling some of those underground formats may emerge soon.
I have a feeling some of those underground formats may emerge soon.
which sorta turns my stomach.... knowing that microsoft will have taken yet another idea conjured by somebody else, changed it around a bit, then claimed the technology was their invention all along. this is what i don't like about microsoft.
i don't think it will happen though. the term "mp3" and it's technology is so deeply rooted in the computer world that not even microsoft will be able to phase it out.
as far as sound quality goes... i think it is equal between the formats. what impressed me was the size of the .wma files for the sound they produced.
I remember when I was 11 years old and I got my first CD player. I was in awe that some laser could read music off of that shiny disk. I remember wondering to myslf, "self.. when you're older, what kind of medium will they put music on that could be any cooler than this?". I was also impressed at how I could type in the track number that I wanted to hear and the cd would go right to the song. Nowadays, with mp3-capable cd players as well as personal mp3 players like the ipod, you can fit ~200 records onto one CD (or device). 200 records, hundreds of hours of music on something you can hold in the palm of your hand. Is anybody else as impressed by this as me?
i don't think it will happen though. the term "mp3" and it's technology is so deeply rooted in the computer world that not even microsoft will be able to phase it out.
as far as sound quality goes... i think it is equal between the formats. what impressed me was the size of the .wma files for the sound they produced.
I remember when I was 11 years old and I got my first CD player. I was in awe that some laser could read music off of that shiny disk. I remember wondering to myslf, "self.. when you're older, what kind of medium will they put music on that could be any cooler than this?". I was also impressed at how I could type in the track number that I wanted to hear and the cd would go right to the song. Nowadays, with mp3-capable cd players as well as personal mp3 players like the ipod, you can fit ~200 records onto one CD (or device). 200 records, hundreds of hours of music on something you can hold in the palm of your hand. Is anybody else as impressed by this as me?
If you look at the last 20 years the companies who invent stuff arent as wealthy as the comapies who perfect stuff. Microsfot is good at doiung that. They work at providing a complete package instead of having an OS and 100 programs to do what you need to do, you just have 1 OS with most of that built in. Its what consumers want, and theyll provide it. Its all about content
