PDA

View Full Version : MP3Pro revolution, nullsoft not interested


RocketMan_Wes
18th June 2001, 13:00
It seems the guys who invented the Mp3 codec, Thomson Multimedia and the Fraunhofer Institute et al, have finally released the future to Mp3.

With news having already spread to zdnet, msnbc, cnn, cnet, yahoo, and mp3.com it looks like Nullsoft is keeping it's head under the sand on this one.

The Winamp team has refused to even respond to the onslaught.

Apparently the new codec uses Spectral Band Replication (SBR) to DOUBLE up on the space savings. The only bad news being that MP3 hardware, without software upgradeability will be immediately redundant.

With mp3 players, like RCA MP3Pro Audio Player (from Coding Technologies) already available winamp is looking like it needs to play catch-up for the first time in ages. This fact alone is already creating a fossil out of the beloved Nullsoft.

In the mean time, I'll be converting all my mp3's from the last four years to the new format. While we wait for the nullsoft team to come back from their Tahiti vacation, there's a coup at the presidential gates.

Cya Around,hopefully...

Twilightseer
18th June 2001, 14:59
AAC, TAC, OGG, WMA : all of these formats were supposed to kill MP3. They didn't...

RocketMan_Wes
18th June 2001, 15:18
I think you're wrong.

Firstly, this is the first major development from the _creator_ of mp3. This means that industry stops and listens when they're about to speak. Even if it's gonna be a false alarm, it's still a potential "pearl harbour".
When the guys with "nukes" grumble, who are we to sit back and say: "Oh it's nothing, we know what's coming"
Do you remember how fast cell phones exploded, and the satellite phone guys said it was just a fad?

Secondly, with an immediate space savings of 50% (with the same certified quality), that translates to a savings in bandwidth, storage, and ultimately MONEY!
I perceive those other things you mentioned as clones and quick-fix attempts by companies (with less than half the imagination of Fraunhofer et al.) to try and steal market share for themselves. True, they didn't destroy the standard, but yes, they STILL have an undeniable presence AND market share. If this is allowed to continue, with small bits of market share going to every new player, then the conclusion remains the same for nullsoft, in Archeology.

ecstatic
18th June 2001, 16:33
Will you stop posting the same thread over and over? :mad: Go here (http://forums.winamp.com/showthread.php?threadid=52470) if you want to talk about it!

RocketMan_Wes
18th June 2001, 16:46
Thanks for the link.

The reason I started this thread was because the other discussion was LOCKED without proper explanation!

You see, without COMMUNICATION, users start using unhappy smily's etc.. this is the whole point I'm trying to drive home with nullsoft. Unfortunately they're off to Tahiti while winamp3 becomes JurassicPark3.

Matt
18th June 2001, 17:03
The thread was locked becuase you'd already posted the same thing elsewhere. Plus there are numerous mp3pro threads around.

and be patient and stop posting the same thing. Mp3pro support may be added. But give them time will you.

Also it's not a major development. Not that major. Certainly no reason to convert existing mp3's to it.

RocketMan_Wes
18th June 2001, 17:14
Hey Matt

My discussion was locked >before< I had posted anywhere else! The only reason I'm now bitchin' is BECAUSE noone is answering back!


Simple Question: What is happening about MP3Pro?
================================================


Only answer available: Noone gives a hoot, just stop talking about it!

Maybe the reason there are SO MANY THREADS is because it's IMPORTANT!

John M
18th June 2001, 20:36
mp3pro still has to establish itself as a major format, or at least viable. its too early to tell at this point. and i seriously doubt the NS crew is ignoring this. just chill, no more threads about mp3pro.

Mr Jones
18th June 2001, 21:19
Originally posted by watadoo
Let's talk about Tahiti. That sounds better than anything else I can think of.

You been lately?

ElChevelle
18th June 2001, 22:23
:rolleyes:
You bitch more than my ex-wife.

And Tahiti sounds great right now:)

John M
19th June 2001, 02:40
sittin on a beach in tahiti, chev's ex-wife at my side...

:D

skamp
19th June 2001, 11:28
Hey there's a guy that said : AAC, WMA etc... were supposed to take over mp3, but they didn't...

First, AAC isn't even distributed yet. If you find myself an AAC encoder, you'd make me VERY happy.
Second, for the first time, with mp3PRO, I really see a true technological advance. I mean, wma is not that great, ogg is just the same as mp3, etc... mp3PRO, on the opposite, is REALLY great.

Why shouldn't we post about mp3PRO anymore ? Is that a forbidden subject ? Is Nullsoft embarassed about something that has to do with mp3PRO ?

Sorry for my poor english.

Xerxes
19th June 2001, 11:41
I'm sure if MP3pro is becomes popular, they will add the capability for it- just like winamp has capability for many other much more obscure formats.

Tahiti... would be awesome- At least i get to go to Puerto Vallerta this summer :)

Twilightseer
19th June 2001, 11:48
Originally posted by skamp
Hey there's a guy that said : AAC, WMA etc... were supposed to take over mp3, but they didn't...

First, AAC isn't even distributed yet. If you find myself an AAC encoder, you'd make me VERY happy.
Second, for the first time, with mp3PRO, I really see a true technological advance. I mean, wma is not that great, ogg is just the same as mp3, etc... mp3PRO, on the opposite, is REALLY great.

Why shouldn't we post about mp3PRO anymore ? Is that a forbidden subject ? Is Nullsoft embarassed about something that has to do with mp3PRO ?

Sorry for my poor english.

A couple of points I'd like to clarify
1) AAC used to be a free format. "Used to" because it has now been taken over by Dolby which plans to develop it for commercial purposes. It used to be freely downloadable, it now no longer is. However, you can still find encoders and plug-ins with a little research.
2) When OGG appeared, everyone raved about how great it was and how it would soon replace MP3. It hasn't done so. Conclusion: there is a difference between the reviews and what actually happens. Even if mp3Pro was likely to kill MP3, it wouldn't occur before quite some time. No need to rush things.
3) mp3Pro is not a forbidden subject. But there is a difference between posting a couple of topics about it and literally flooding the boards with messages that are all the same.

peter
19th June 2001, 12:40
I believe that OGG will completely whip your asses when it's done. RC1 encoder (the newest one) still lacks a lot of planned features (joint stereo, low bitrates, etc). I'm waiting for RC2...
Anyway, RC1 decoder sounds much better than old beta4 one (new plugin will be on winamp.com tonight I think).

Thor
19th June 2001, 16:08
OGG & AAC might be just as good to replace mp3 ... But still I do agree with RocketMan_Wes that MP3Pro support for Winamp should added :p

DJ Egg
21st June 2001, 21:41
So PP, when does your new MP3Pro plugin get released then? ;) :D

peter
21st June 2001, 21:51
when i get some better mp3pro player to reverse-engineer :p

s1138
21st June 2001, 22:38
/me waits for PP's mp3pro winamp plugin. (cause we all know PP is the cool plugin guy):)

but isnt the extension for mp3pro .mp3 ?
and i believe you can play mp3pro files in winamp. they just have some weird thing. just ask bonj, he tried it.

Lepre41
21st June 2001, 23:21
Winamp can already play them? Hmm... sounds cool, but I'd have to try that myself. Anyone know where to get an mp3pro encoder? I would be nice, also for comparison purposes...
Thanks.

[TRIBE]Muad-Dib
22nd June 2001, 04:45
i got the encoder and palyer from the site and i tested the dif between a reg. mp3 and a mp3(PRO) file.
the file is half the size of the reg. mp3 and the sound is better,(at least when played in the mp3pro player).
Now when you play a mp3pro file in winamp (IT SOUNDS LIKE SHIT!)it fails to sound even remotly like a standerd mp3 the sound is fuzzy and low....(like shit!)
while this is only due to winamp not taking full advantige of all the info in the mp3pro file. In closing, if the support is not added to winamp i will have to stop using it.. the mp3pro file is smaller sounds better and is going to take over.........

NeoRenegade
22nd June 2001, 06:10
It amazes me how some people can be so blindly devoted to new technology. With normal MP3's you can put more than 7½ hours of music at 192kbps on a single regular 650Mb CD. So my question is, why the hell do you so badly need MP3Pro support on Winamp?!

peter
22nd June 2001, 12:22
According to Vorbis ML devtalk, RC2 encoder (with joint stereo) will keep '128 kbps mp3' quality at 80 kbps, without any patent/license bullshit (and - yes - plug-in that will play these files is already available on winamp.com).

s1138
22nd June 2001, 12:41
what sawg said is all true for me too.
i for one, dont ever see myself switching to mp3pro. and how you ask am i going to do that (well maybe your not asking) i am going to search for mp3's with a bitrate of 128 or more.

blahblahblahblah......

plus there is the whole, watermark thing, thats bad news....

John M
22nd June 2001, 14:59
my theory? if winamp doesnt support mp3pro, mp3pro will die. i seriously doubt WMA would be as viable as it is if winamp didnt support it.

s1138
22nd June 2001, 16:58
wow! good point John M.
/me gives John M candy

Thor
22nd June 2001, 17:11
lol
:D

but MP3Pro is a cool thing, Winamp _should_ support it, but it's not an urgent mather ...

John M
22nd June 2001, 20:06
Originally posted by s1138
wow! good point John M.
/me gives John M candy Why thank you s1138!!! :D

I mean, how many times have u gone to a hax0r site or other l33t site and seen a winamp gif&link? many. sonique gif&link? not much. those are the people that make new technology shit popular, and if they cant play it on winamp, fuck the format.

note: if that doesnt make sense to yall, ok. it soesnt make a bit of sense to me when i go back and reread it. time for some strawberry milk.

s1138
22nd June 2001, 21:38
i see winamp on warez sites all the time.
well the rare occations that i can find a decent warez site:D

NeoRenegade
23rd June 2001, 16:53
Yeah, I'd like to see MP3Pro take off, and to fool around with it, but for God's sake I'm not going to gather a militia and storm Nullsoft HQ just because they can't develop MP3Pro support for yesterday!

Lepre41
24th June 2001, 03:37
Originally posted by John M
and if they cant play it on winamp, fuck the format.
[/B]

dunno... I think you might have that backwards. I don't mean to sound crude, but to use your own words: if it can be played on all other media players, and if can't be played on winamp, then f*ck winamp. Of course, this'll never happen: winamp is morphable and very versatile, and will most likely adapt a leading format long before it becomes as popular as mp3. They won't refuse to use a new format, but if they did they would loose, not the format.

Sorry. That's really a pointless rant. Winamp leads the way in media players, and I'm sure it won't hesitate support any format that becomes predominant.

skamp
25th June 2001, 13:52
Originally posted by NeoRenegade
It amazes me how some people can be so blindly devoted to new technology. With normal MP3's you can put more than 7½ hours of music at 192kbps on a single regular 650Mb CD. So my question is, why the hell do you so badly need MP3Pro support on Winamp?!

Well I currently have around 20 Gigs of mp3s on my 30 gigs hard drive (that is... uh... hundreds of hours of music at 192kbps). Well, since I also rip my own DVD's, I need at least 8 gigs of free space. So you see, if my mp3's could weigh 10 gigs instead of 20, I would be happy :) The other thing is, as soon as a hardware mp3pro player comes out, I'll buy it, since memory cards cost A LOT !

layer3maniac
26th June 2001, 03:54
Originally posted by Twilightseer
A couple of points I'd like to clarify
1) AAC used to be a free format. "Used to" because it has now been taken over by Dolby which plans to develop it for commercial purposes. It used to be freely downloadable, it now no longer is. However, you can still find encoders and plug-ins with a little research.
For three years now Dolby has intimidated people with their Cease and Desist letters into abandoning AAC projects. Those greedy patent nazis at Dolby make me sick. When is someone going to test these bogus algorithm patent claims in court? Instead of wasting time fighting losing battles over the future of filesharing over a large centralized server (ala Napster) with the aim of distributing copyrighted materials, the mp3 community needs to pool it's resources to fight the real enemy. Does anyone know of any instance where Dolby, Fraunhofer, ATT, & Sony's bogus illigetimate AAC patents have been tested in court? To create an International Standard with the plan to corner the market and make everyone pay unrealistic patent license royalties ($10,000 unrefundable admin fee just to CONSIDER your business proposal) sounds criminal to me...
I WANT MY AAC!!!!!!!!!!

[Edited by layer3maniac on 06-26-2001 at 01:41 AM]

Chandana
27th June 2001, 06:28
LET THE NULLSOFT HAVE THEIR VACATION

Lot of blah blah going on the forum.

At the same time the history is going to repeat itself. At the dawn of the mp3 miracle, people really didn't seems to figure it out that what to do with it. Their new found music file format. And suddenly Winamp and the rest of the clones paved the way to history's most successful entertainment system for computers.

And later Napster. Music at your disposal. Wow! whatta wonderful world it had been... Now reduced but quality packed new mp3pro file format is going to do the same only more efficiently.

Only problem is mp3pro somewhat a propriority system. So I guess things will take sometime for Nullsoft guys to get around this. I am sure If winamp doesn't something better will come along the way.

See Napster is dead. We've got http://www.audiogalaxy.com. It even categorise the songs somthing Napster couldn't do.(Don't ask me for how long.)

Same story for my cool Winamp. I don't wanna see any bad dreams but I really do my friends. If the support is not added I (people) will soon swtched into something else.

(In worst case I will sit back with my know-how packed friends and write one for myself. Ha.. Ha..)The problem is the Nullsoft guys are the best ones to do it.

When the first breed of mp3pro see the lime-light. My gut says its here to stay. Sad it got the taste of MONEY????

It tastes as good as its early cousin did.(For those who haven't got taste, http://www.codingtechnologies.com will give the juice)

So I obviously gonna let my NullSoft friends to have their vacation in full swing.
I had fun... I had joy..... I had seasons in the son.....!

But don't forget this guy who loves you for what you did for the last summer.

Brackna
27th June 2001, 09:41
Why is everyone speaking of that Mp3 Pro will replace Mp3. Mp3 Pro = Mp3 but with a small diverence in encoding, thanks to SBR. What stand behind every file precise MP3 and nothing else. So it´s not a replacement but a inprovement of Mp3, nothing more and nothing less...

Winamp should apply this technologie as soon as possible, it´s the future.

Other formats of Audio are also good but support is low. Mp3 is widely spread and this improvement is only taking it one step higher and lets other formats disapear faster. Like WMA and RA...

Real Audio is great for livestream things on internet but not for it´s quality of sound.

WMA is only a try of Microsoft to make even more money for less quality than MP3.

OGG is a great format but not supported by the major software (burner software) and Hardware so not intresting, but it´s good...

Everything else is already dead...

The Arena is filled with 4 teams and that´s it.

MP3 & MP3 PRO improvement. (Team 1)
WMA (Team 2)
RA (Team 3)
Recording Companies & Goverment (Team 4)

That´s it...Nothing more and nothing less..

NeoRenegade
27th June 2001, 19:07
The problem with MP3Pro is that all the sheep who like it say it will never replace MP3. Get real, people. The extension is the same as MP3, and they decided not to give it a new extension for a reason — they intend for it to replace MP3.

Brackna
27th June 2001, 19:37
Sorry it´s still no replacement of Mp3 but an inprovement of it. And if it´s a replacement it´s one with a good CV already they got my support.

No serious why all the shouting of replacement. Just see it as een Improvement. Why else should Fraunhoffer be involved, they already have a good encoder for MP3 now so why not make it better... huh?

A Year (or 3) back everyone shouted that mp4 was comming next, well as soon I heard this news I thought of those years gone by.. No recording Companies No Goverment to restrict us from using the format... The good Ol´days..

Just gonna leaf it at that...

End.:D

Wish
27th June 2001, 19:45
Anyone who thinks MP3Pro is better than high bitrate(192kbps and above) MP3 needs to get a raincheck. I'm too lazy to go into details, just suffice to say that 64kbps MP3Pro is only around 96-112kbps MP3 quality. 96kbps MP3Pro would probably be around 128kbps quality. It isn't a replacement for MP3, it's an improvement for low bitrate files. It sounds better than 64kbps MP3, but will not be better than a 128kbps MP3 encoded with the latest LAME or FHG encoders.

NeoRenegade
28th June 2001, 18:44
What it all comes down to is that Thompson/Fraunhofer made a major problem by keeping the same file extension but slightly changing the format. If you ask me, for a format as well established as MP3, that's a major nono.

I hope to God MP3Pro doesn't really take off, because then the entire MP3 industry will have to change hardware players such as the Diamond and the MPTrip. Otherwise, to play an MP3Pro on a portable player you'd have to decode it to WAV and reencode it as an MP3, which, since you are compressing something that has alreayd been compress, will sound almost as bad as the MP3Pro song would sound improperly decoded by the player as it would be.

Imagine this.... you know how many idiots there are out there using the Xing MP3 encoder, right? Well, imagine this same stupidity unleashed upon MP3Pro. What we'll have is really mangled songs floating all around the net, with people honestly having no idea whether they're MP3 or MP3Pro!

scottyc
28th June 2001, 18:49
Originally posted by NeoRenegade
Otherwise, to play an MP3Pro on a portable player you'd have to decode it to WAV and reencode it as an MP3


the way i read it, you don't have to do this, and pre-mp3pro players will be able to play the mp3, but without the 'groundbreaking advancements' of mp3pro. but also without a good deal of sound quality that a regular mp3 would have played with the same equipment.

intranix
1st July 2001, 12:04
I certainly dont think using .mp3 as the extension is a good thing. I can see a lot of confusion arising when it comes to downloading, playing and burning mp3pro files.

I can forsee myself using nero to burn a mp3 which i forgot is an mp3pro file, and ending up with a gastly Audio CD!

I personally quite like using Lame to create 64kbps ABR 44KHz mono files, they sound great (easily like 128kbps CBR), u can fit loads onto a portable, and there is no confusion :) (Plus u can send it to a freind using hotmail cos the files are usually under 2Mb)

I think people are deceived with mp3 pro, from what i hear, the file itself has only a few changes, the rest is done by the decoder, kind of like how Real Audio works, and this SBR thing can be applied to all sort of audio formats...

Why couldnt they just get on and develop mp4, which is sposed to be a cross between vqf and aac ?

NeoRenegade
1st July 2001, 18:35
Originally posted by intranix
I personally quite like using Lame to create 64kbps ABR 44KHz mono files, they sound great
Yeah, except they're in MONO!

Are you deaf in one ear, or just very accepting of shallow sound? :confused:
:D

intranix
1st July 2001, 18:43
No im not deaf...

I bet ypu at least half of your 'stereo' mp3s' have little or no stereo seperation, i find that most productions released on CD rarely use stereo to its capailities, so encoding to mono doesnt seem so bad.

In case you dont know, nearly all mp3 players known to man, and indeed nearly all audio players, output mono to both channels... all u lack is 'seperation'

peter
1st July 2001, 19:32
if you claim that you really aren't deaf, you should wait for next Ogg encoder release and their new lossless joint stereo - according to vorbis ML talk, it will shave off up to 40% of data (vbr) without hurting output sound quality.

s1138
2nd July 2001, 00:27
^ Vorbis guy, who also codes cool stuff.
listen to him;)

King Elfa
2nd July 2001, 01:00
:Newsflash:

This just in . . . read all about it . . . read all about it!

MP3Pro Project Scrapped

More info here (http://www.bullshit.com/)

fish
2nd July 2001, 01:08
Originally posted by King Elfa
:Newsflash:

This just in . . . read all about it . . . read all about it!

MP3Pro Project Scrapped

More info here (http://www.bullshit.com/)

I wish :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

John M
2nd July 2001, 02:56
Originally posted by King Elfa
:Newsflash:

This just in . . . read all about it . . . read all about it!

MP3Pro Project Scrapped

More info here (http://www.bullshit.com/) that post was almost orgasmic to read. unfortunately, it was BS.

NeoRenegade
2nd July 2001, 03:05
Originally posted by intranix
I bet you at least half of your 'stereo' mp3s' have little or no stereo seperation, i find that most productions released on CD rarely use stereo to its capailities, so encoding to mono doesnt seem so bad.
Well actually, I find quite a bit of separation in my songs. It's mostly background stuff though. Making the songs mono makes them very boring to me.

Gambrinus
3rd July 2001, 17:14
Wow, OK I think to many people are looking at just minor point and not looking at the whole picture here. Lets look at the facts. The Encoder/player is gonna cost developers something like $7.50 per unit. The extension will be the same. Winamp is a free product. The files are approx. half the size at same quality. Ok with that we can determine that if Winamp puts in native support for mp3pro then they would have to charge for the player. If it is a plugin (what I think They should do to start with) then you give winamp away still and charge for the plugin. Why is the extention the same? So after everyone that uses filesharring programs start downloading new mp3pro files they will eventually be force to switch to the new codec. That way the creators of mp3/mp3pro get the buck they have been screaming for. Now as someone who has dropped thousands of dollers into stereo equipment and tens of thousands on CDs, Albums, and such....I think $7.50 is VERY attractive of a price. Now why do people want smaller files at the same quality (cant believe someone further back in thread said that this pretty much is not needed (something about all that music you can fit on one cd in mp3 format)). OK alot of people have bought these small players for mp3, but the smart ones bought the players with upgradable firmware. Other people like me have a VERY HUGE COLLECTION...my collection grows at a faster rate then the Hard drive company are dishing out bigger drives. Between me and my father we have 300 gigs of music. Are goal is to have a better selection that CDnow! Ok now that you see that we have that much music how do you suggest we make backups of it....Shall I use 461 Blank CD's? Shall I drop $900 bucks on 3 100gig maxtor drives? Now other comapnies like musicmatch are contenders here too. Now alot of people buy into software from companies like this that offer a lifetime subscription to their updates. Well with the new cost of the codec how do companies deal with this. They can offer mp3pro upgradesfor free and chew their profits away, they can charge the 7.50 for the codec, they can do nothing or they can take the smart way for themselves and start a whole new product that we can pay retail for and then they can offer upgrades on that. Next problem is how do you get years of MP3 collections updated to mp3pro? Who is gonna make the batch decode/encoding software?

NeoRenegade
4th July 2001, 00:19
Amazing speech. Too bad it's all in one paragraph and all...

So hard on the eyes...

Gambrinus
4th July 2001, 01:46
I am also available for partys but I am not resposible for run on sentances, long paragraphs, and I usually only charge a 6 pack of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale.

Sorry next time I'll use bullet points! :)

Chandana
4th July 2001, 12:11
Oh...Boy!
We are going pretty intersting here in the forum.

Sad...... I am yet to get a codec for mp3pro.

Sounds like to me that we might mess up with our so called cool PC entertainment system made possible by the loyalty free mp3 format and draw the ending line.

Sure, Thompson/Fraunhofer guys are playing smart here.

Because of the very reasons that the both versions are extentioned as mp3 but with core differences either we've gotta upgrade or live with bulky mp3. Still when it comes to download a mp3 I might get mp3pros as well as mp3 and when I am gonna play it, anney.... my WinAmp doesn't play it right.

Wonder who's gonna come up with the wonder pill?

Problem is whether we can ever come up with a solution is so much of a question.

Perhaps now I wish mp3pro may never take off......

Gosh.... I can't sleep now.....

s1138
4th July 2001, 13:08
well to not download an mp3pro, all you have to do is search for a higher bitrate. cause right now mp3pro can only be encoded up to 64kbps

we need a shorter name for mp3pro, it makes my arm hurt typing it

intranix
4th July 2001, 13:12
is it me or were the last 2 posts hard to read ?

i must be drunk :)

s1138
4th July 2001, 13:22
i guess you must be

Wish
4th July 2001, 13:27
Why would you want to convert from high quality mp3s(192-320kbps) to 64/96kbps MP3Pro? MP3Pro is not the replacement for high quality mp3s. Just for space savings? Hard drives have large and plentiful space and aren't too expensive these days. But I guess if you're silly enough to want to convert MP3 to MP3Pro(lossy to lossy format, e.g. 128kbps MP3 to 64kbps MP3Pro) you're silly enough to do anything. :p

Some articles to read:
http://fastforward.iwarp.com/mp3pro_opinions.html

http://fastforward.iwarp.com/tamsjam.html

intranix
4th July 2001, 14:29
I would never convert from one lossy format to another, regardless of what they are! I tried conversion from mp3 to mp3pro and hmm it werent too nice :)

The only time you should convert to a lossy format is when its from a non-lossy format in my opinion :P

I think there are 3 main goals for the newer codecs which are appearing:

1. Near CD quality streaming over a 56kbps connection

2. Extra storage on portable devices

3. To allow for more data for motion video when space is a limitation. (DVD > CD conversions)

And on a final and non-relevant note: A thank you to the UK police who will not arrest people in posession of Cannabis! its a step in the right direction, and may the world rejoice blah blah :P

*shmoke*

Chandana
5th July 2001, 08:06
Well, In my Audiogalaxy I can't search songs by the bit rate.

Gotta do a smart guess over the mp3pro content even if it will in the future.

Good not much is available as mp3pros just yet but for how long.

Still can't sleep by the fear of ending the mp3 party.

layer3maniac
5th July 2001, 14:09
Originally posted by Chandana
Well, In my Audiogalaxy I can't search songs by the bit rate.Sure you can. Instead of clicking "SEARCH FOR SONG" on the side, click "Choose A Version" at the bottom. The next screen lists locations, filesize, play time, and bitrate of every version of the song that is available.

THEMike
5th July 2001, 14:51
Quality on Winamp with MP3 decoder
Not 100% sure how MP3Pro works. Someone said it improves performance at a lower bitrate, and I think that is true.

It's not a replacement to MP3 in once sense, it's like the next version of the format, and as so is backward compatible. It contains data to produce the low bitrate part of the signal in the same way as MP3 does. This is what can be read by existing MP3 decoders. This is why when you play an MP3Pro file in winamp it sounds crap, you're only getting the 64bps version of the file.

Interlaced is the second set of data covering the high bitrate ness. This is interpreted by MP3Pro decoders to produce the good sound.

Somehow this also leads to lower file size at the same quality, but I'm not sure how.

Winamp support
Fraunhoffer institute own the patent to MP3, they didn't charge, it became huge and they want a peice of that pie, which is fair enough really. Their work, they never said they wouldn't charge. Bit mean, but they have the right to do so.

MP3Pro is designed to extend and enhance the already de-facto standard MP3. They want to keep a check on this and get the finance rolling in for their hard work.

To this end you need to license the technology, this means that anyone who produces an encoder or decoder for the format has to pay a fee per unit shipped. Whether or not they charge for this.

Ok so if AOL/NullSoft bundle MP3Pro playback into winamp, then they have to pay this $7.50 figure per download. Not a viable business model for a free player (even when it wasn't free it was only $10). There is no-way that NullSoft can viably provide this plugin FoC unless some deal is struck with FI


So someone else can write the plugin is probably their attitude. That's the whole point in WinAMP's architecture. Either FI could do it and dist it free, or for a small fee or whatever to try and get the WA audience interested in their format, or someone else can try and make cash out of it.

Bottom line is if NS charge they'll get slammed. If they don't they'll go 'bust' (in fact AOL would just stop the dist of the plugin probably)

WInamp Dead if MP3Pro takes off?

Now WinAMP support may seem key to the success of Mp3PRo to us WinAMP fanatics, but the bottom line is it's not essential. However it's just one of many popular players that could have an issue. Not talking software here. My Nomad can't do it, no portable can, my DVD player supports MP3, but not Pro etc etc etc.

Ok say that all software players except winamp provide a (free) MP3Pro decoder, and all hardware gets sorted. Winamp will then have to provide it to survive if the format takes off as a result, and I'm sure they will, they won't let that kill them.

WMA
WMA seems ok to me. My Nomad can play it, the quality is good enough for me at 96bps and it's a lot smaller at that size. MP3Pro may become an option for me if the Nomad firmware supports it without charge.

MP3Pro summary
Problem with MP3Pro is that there will be a cost associated with encoder and decoder. therefore there won't be much choice of tool to encode and decode. that will seriously limit take off. Especially given WMA doesn't have that problem, and that ogg vorbis is even less limited, and looking at the 1.0 stuff out now, seriously solves the size issue (Side note: time to mailbomb creative to update nomad firmware with ogg!)

blah