Club CDFreaks - Knowledge is Power - View Single Post - Converting from ASF to OGG and some tunebite questions...

**Seán** · 10-01-2006

Napster uses the Windows Media Audio format at 128kbps from what I recall. ASF is the abbreviation for Active Streaming Format and is generally only used with Windows Media Audio and/or Video.

To find out what the bitrate is, first look through your Napster downloaded collection for a song that is as close to 4 minutes as possible (±15 seconds if need be) and then get its file size in MB. Based on the file size of that ~4 minute song, the file size will indicate the bitrate as follows: ~3.75MB => 128kbps, ~4.69MB => 160kbps, ~5.63MB => 192kbps, ~6.56MB => 224kbps and ~7.5MB => 256kbps.

There have been many debates on whether WMA at 128kbps sounded better or worse than MP3, however going by a past Audio codec comparison test (dating May 2004), out of 6 finely tuned codec’s tested at 128kbps (OGG, MPC, Lame, iTunes, Atrac3, WMA), the WMA codec came out 2nd worst after Atrac3. However, the encoder behind each codec has likely improved since, for example several new updates have been made to the OGG codec, while the MPC codec has not been worked on for many years.

My recommendation would be to use a good pair of over-ear headphones and try re-encoding a few tracks using Tunebite and see how they compare with the original. Unfortunately, no matter what codec you use, you will not get the exact quality of that produced by WMA, even though WMA itself does not do the best at encoding. For example, if you re-encode a WMA track to MP3, you will end up with the audio artefacts (unwanted sounds) from both formats as well as the information 'lost' during the original encoding process to WMA as well as the re-encoding process to MP3. A good real life comparison would be like taping a slightly dusty record. You will end up with the crackles & pops of the record along with tape hiss as well as the combined frequency responses and high/low frequency cut-off’s from each.

Unfortunately, as I never used Napster, let alone Tunebite, I am unable to comment on its high speed dubbing. On the other hand, I could not imagine any issue with it, especially since it is a direct digital re-encoding.

10-01-2006	#2 (permalink)
Seán News Coordinator, Reviewer & Senior Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Republic of Ireland (North West) Posts: 2,574	Re: Converting from ASF to OGG and some tunebite questions... Napster uses the Windows Media Audio format at 128kbps from what I recall. ASF is the abbreviation for Active Streaming Format and is generally only used with Windows Media Audio and/or Video. To find out what the bitrate is, first look through your Napster downloaded collection for a song that is as close to 4 minutes as possible (±15 seconds if need be) and then get its file size in MB. Based on the file size of that ~4 minute song, the file size will indicate the bitrate as follows: ~3.75MB => 128kbps, ~4.69MB => 160kbps, ~5.63MB => 192kbps, ~6.56MB => 224kbps and ~7.5MB => 256kbps. There have been many debates on whether WMA at 128kbps sounded better or worse than MP3, however going by a past Audio codec comparison test (dating May 2004), out of 6 finely tuned codec’s tested at 128kbps (OGG, MPC, Lame, iTunes, Atrac3, WMA), the WMA codec came out 2nd worst after Atrac3. However, the encoder behind each codec has likely improved since, for example several new updates have been made to the OGG codec, while the MPC codec has not been worked on for many years. My recommendation would be to use a good pair of over-ear headphones and try re-encoding a few tracks using Tunebite and see how they compare with the original. Unfortunately, no matter what codec you use, you will not get the exact quality of that produced by WMA, even though WMA itself does not do the best at encoding. For example, if you re-encode a WMA track to MP3, you will end up with the audio artefacts (unwanted sounds) from both formats as well as the information 'lost' during the original encoding process to WMA as well as the re-encoding process to MP3. A good real life comparison would be like taping a slightly dusty record. You will end up with the crackles & pops of the record along with tape hiss as well as the combined frequency responses and high/low frequency cut-off’s from each. Unfortunately, as I never used Napster, let alone Tunebite, I am unable to comment on its high speed dubbing. On the other hand, I could not imagine any issue with it, especially since it is a direct digital re-encoding.