Confirmation WMA encoder uses Windows built in

[Nil Einne]

Hi,

Some of the stuff I've read in the forum seem to suggest this and it also makes the most sense, but since the release notes and other documentation aren't clear to me is it confirmed that the WMA codec DLL is at least for encoding the audio stream, simply using the Windows built in codec?

I ask because while Microsoft has not paid much attention to the WMA codec for a long time, they are also probably the only one who ever really developed a half-decent implementation of it. I believe FFmpeg has a WMA encoder but it's so bad that I've heard people say it often isn't transparent at the highest lossless bitrate.

(As to why I want to use WMA, it's not that important.)

Thanks

[Spoon]

Re: Confirmation WMA encoder uses Windows built in

We use the Microsoft implementation.

[JUMP2]

Re: Confirmation WMA encoder uses Windows built in

Didn't microsoft abandoned wma? wma barely get mentioned these days so idk if that's because it been discontinued

[ForSerious]

Re: Confirmation WMA encoder uses Windows built in

It's not really being worked on that I know of. From my own comparison tests, I would say because there's nothing left to improve.
The only killer wma has is that it's not open source. I am probably the number one fanboy of wma and have been using it exclusively since 2005.

The attractions of wma for me are: Two-pass encoding, captured sample rates over 44.1kHz, higher bit rates than 320, multi channel encoding and the lossless option.
I have ran numerous tests comparing wma pro against other codecs, and it's never on the bottom of the charts. (Unless it's standard wma.) What I'm trying to say, is that wma is still fully compatible with all current media container uses. I really think it's the 'not open source' aspect that kills it.