Convert WMA to OGG ???

[Rob Kirkbride]

Gene Heskett wrote on 21/01/2005 08:28:

>I made some comparison files from some of my disks, both with a 
>commercial shareware encoder for making mp3's and with the ogg 
>method.  To me the obvious winner at any comparable bit rate was ogg, 
>and at quality level 6, its very very difficult to tell the ogg from 
>the original, at Q7 there is no discernable difference, and I can 
>listen to it all night with no fatigue whatsoever. I don't have more 
>than 20 megs of mp3's in my own collection of about 2.5 gigs. and it 
>sure beats lugging a 20+ pound cd holder around and getting it 
>stolen.
>
>  
>
I'd second that. I've had both a minidisc player which uses WMA? and an 
MP3 player. I now have an iriver H320 player which uses oggs. To say 
oggs sound better than MP3s is a understatement. Being a bit of a hi-fi 
nut I used to laugh at people who thought MP3 bore any relation to the 
original sound but oggs are massively better than MP3s - (I think i use 
quality 7 as I recall). MP3s just seemed to remove all the sublties and 
upset the timing - making them tiresome to listen to as you say (and boring)
I'm really very happy with my iriver and it works fine with Linux - in 
fact when I plugged into a windows machine here at work it didn't work 
cos I didn't have the drivers!

Native oggs are definitely the way to go!

Rob