WMA again

[Bagder]

I'm sure that if you made a package of what you have, there will be lots of other people interested to help out getting it added to Rockbox.

I also suggest using IRC and the rockbox-dev mailing list for detailed dev support and assistance.

Very nice work!

[Marsdaddy]

I'm sure that if you made a package of what you have, there will be lots of other people interested to help out getting it added to Rockbox.

Yes thanks, I will have a go at doing it myself as I'd like to understand the rockbox architecture, but if I run out of time or whatever I'll pass it over.

[saratoga]

To be fair, the layman doesn't have the equipment to carry out *accurate* double-blind/ABX testing, nor are they willing to. According to them, if there's a minor discrepancy (in terms of SQ), then that's what it is - minor. Why exert any more effort, if, at the end of it all, the result is a minor amelioration? This situation is even more appropriate when talking in contemporary terms, of the majority of AAC/iTunes/iPod users. 

You just need a computer, headphones, and a WMA decoder.  Anyone listening to WMA has all three of these, so I don't follow your point.

Another example; in the early days when we were dealing with MP3 players that held mega- rather than giga- bytes of storage, and before OGG and LAME were widely supported on portable units, a balance was required between having decent SQ output and small filesize. With stock headphones, the difference between 128KBpS MP3, and 64KBpS WMA (as was often compared by Microsoft), was negligible. The 'choice' then, was simple. It might not be the case today, but the saying remains true, in that old habits die hard. Even if people *did* later realise the difference, it is far easier to click on a drop-down box in WMP (to increase Bitrate), than to go digging around for new codecs/rippers.

AFAIK there has never been a DAP that supported WMA but not LAME.  And its definately debateable that WMA was ever a better choice.  WMA generally ties for last place with LAME in most low bitrate listening tests, and thats the much newer WMAv3 codec.  Its not clear that WMA was ever a viable low bitrate codec given that fhg had their IS low bitrate MP3 codec out first, and then LAME came out.  Only exception I can think of is maybe at 32kbps (did you really go that low for music?). 

[safetydan]

The protocol is to create a patch and submit it to the tracker. You might also want to join the IRC channel if you have any questions about the codec infrastructure.

Will be very cool to see this integrated as it's the second last feature (video being the last one) that a lot of new people ask for.

[MU4L]

To be fair, the layman doesn't have the equipment to carry out *accurate* double-blind/ABX testing, nor are they willing to. According to them, if there's a minor discrepancy (in terms of SQ), then that's what it is - minor. Why exert any more effort, if, at the end of it all, the result is a minor amelioration? This situation is even more appropriate when talking in contemporary terms, of the majority of AAC/iTunes/iPod users. 

You just need a computer, headphones, and a WMA decoder.  Anyone listening to WMA has all three of these, so I don't follow your point.

I'm talking about portable audio players, though. Perhaps I should have made that clear in the initial post.

Another example; in the early days when we were dealing with MP3 players that held mega- rather than giga- bytes of storage, and before OGG and LAME were widely supported on portable units, a balance was required between having decent SQ output and small filesize. With stock headphones, the difference between 128KBpS MP3, and 64KBpS WMA (as was often compared by Microsoft), was negligible. The 'choice' then, was simple. It might not be the case today, but the saying remains true, in that old habits die hard. Even if people *did* later realise the difference, it is far easier to click on a drop-down box in WMP (to increase Bitrate), than to go digging around for new codecs/rippers.

AFAIK there has never been a DAP that supported WMA but not LAME.  And its definately debateable that WMA was ever a better choice.  WMA generally ties for last place with LAME in most low bitrate listening tests, and thats the much newer WMAv3 codec.  Its not clear that WMA was ever a viable low bitrate codec given that fhg had their IS low bitrate MP3 codec out first, and then LAME came out.  Only exception I can think of is maybe at 32kbps (did you really go that low for music?). 

Point 1) I don't remember my MPMan players ever supporting LAME (but supported WMA, obviously).

Point 2) WMA *was* a better choice, IMHO, considering that it achieved a balance between filesize and bearable audio quality (versus 128KBpS MP3) with the stock earbuds.

Point 3) The lowest I ever decoded to was 40KBpS mp3 CBR ...




Mad props to Marsdaddy - looking forward to seeing the patch in the near future  !




MU4L

[RoliPoli2411]

A while back I had to consider in what format I would want to store my music collection on my mp3 player (a H120 back then), and I decided to a) listen to the different formats and b) consider the file size to make a decision (I knew it would be at least 5-6000 files).
So first I listened to all available formats and found out that in contrary to common opinion I liked wma-files the most. So I gave a sh... on common opinions and just had to make the decision to go for 64 or 128 kbps. Actually the file size of the 64 kbps made me use this format, as it gave me the opportunity to store all files on my 20 Gig player.
I believe that wma files are better than their reputation and should not be crucified only becasue they are from Microsoft.

Anyway Rockbox made me re-convert all my files to mp3 (having a H340 with 8500 files now this brought me close to the edge) and I am VERY happy with it. Nevertheless if there was wma-support in Rockbox I would immediately switch back.

So Cheers to Marsdaddy!

[Nudel]

Agreed, nice work. I look forward to WMA support. I'm not a big fan of WMA and only have about 5 WMA tracks, but they're things I don't have alternative versions of and it'd be cool to be able to play them on the move.

(My other 450 albums are FLAC.

[Mr. Brownstone]

Excellent work! I look forward to WMA support.

[preglow]

I'm really looking forward to seeing this, Marsdaddy (even though I only have one WMA...). Please let me know if you require any help on the Rockbox codec system or want a tester. Nice work!
And BTW, I'd be more than happy to help in optimising it for the different target platforms.

[Milkmaster]

That's really great news! I also don't have more than 10 WMA files (and dislike the format), however the fact, that Rockbox will support every notable (for the masses) codec in the near future (I'm assuming aac will work reliably too, someday.) is THE killer feature for ordinary people to go Rockbox!

And WMA has one big advantage: You don't have to learn, or download "s***" to use it and every hardware player except the iPods supports it. For many people not having to learn or donwload stuff just to be able to carry their music around with them is a killer argument.
Also most of the MP3 players and stock earbuds owned by the masses make the differences between WMA and e.g. LAME virtually indistinguishable for the average untrained listener.

[gl.tter]

Yeah, v. nice work Mars!  I knew I didn't design a WMA icon in my WPS for nothing .

[JoshPowell]

I reckon that it'll be a couple of works before there could be a version of Rockbox with WMA suport. Not sure what the protocol is for getting my changes into CVS.

Cool. Any progress?

As for getting it into rockbox.. http://forums.rockbox.org/index.php?topic=3127.0

I'm sure that once you get a working patch in the buck tracker, stuff will start happening as WMA support would really help convert some people over.

Josh

[Musicmad]

This is another piece of great news in the history of rockbox! - Excellent work. Looking forward to try this out.

[Marsdaddy]

Cool. Any progress?

Progress is that I have a version of rockbox on my machine that has a WMA codec in it but it is not integrated into the rockbox infrastructure completely (yet) 

I am hoping to get the WMA codec in as a patch very soon, but initially it will not do anything (ie standalone decoder).

So - I am working mainly on getting ASF support into the infrastructure rather than working on the decoder, which may well have a few bugs in it.

[paulheu]

I still think you should post the patch as it is now so others may help in fixing problems/bugs. I know there is a vast number of people waiting for this (myself not included, but still) and you'll be an instant rockbox hero..

I'll gladly add it to my H3x0 build so the iRiver masses can have a crack at it.. The more (bug) reports you get the faster it's gonna be working perfectly I would think..