Free WMA converters?

[Mr. 207]

Im getting a CD player that supports WMA files. Im trying to find a fucking free program tbhat will convert my god damn MP3 files into WMA. Everything I find costs money. And theres NO way I am paying any amount of money for a program I will only use once. So anyone know of ANY free mp3-to-wma converters?

[The Savior]

If you do end up finding one, be forewarned that converting from MP3 to WMA will reduce the sound quality.

[goKi]

i dont think theres a sound quality decrease.. i also have alot of my songs as WMA... theres a very similar aound between 64kb/s WMA files, and 192kb/s MP3 files.. I know that Windows XP Plus! has a MP3-WMA converter, and that Windows Media Player rips to WMA straight off Audio CD. As for a free converter, im quite sure there are some on cnet.. its worth a look.

[The Savior]

I don't want to get into how WMA stacks up versus MP3, but what I'm saying is that converting between the two will reduce quality. It will be in effect doublly compressed, and thus sound worse.

[Ich]

I think you can get a plug-in for Winamp, at least I have one. Although my brother may or may not have made it.

[Thunderbird]

I don't know if it can do it, but I've used Audio Conversion Wizard in the past. It's not completely free, but it is a trial program. Since you only plan to use it once (or so you say), this shouldn't be a problem.

Don't have the URL handy though, you can probably find it on CNET somewhere.

[Gerudo]

Originally posted by The Savior
If you do end up finding one, be forewarned that converting from MP3 to WMA will reduce the sound quality.

Originally posted by The Savior
I don't want to get into how WMA stacks up versus MP3, but what I'm saying is that converting between the two will reduce quality. It will be in effect doublly compressed, and thus sound worse. im sorry, but you, sir, are narrowminded... WMA does NOT decrease the quality... i bet all your mp3's are 320kbps, right?

Originally posted by goKi
i dont think theres a sound quality decrease.. i also have alot of my songs as WMA... theres a very similar aound between 64kb/s WMA files, and 192kb/s MP3 files.. I know that Windows XP Plus! has a MP3-WMA converter, and that Windows Media Player rips to WMA straight off Audio CD. As for a free converter, im quite sure there are some on cnet.. its worth a look. goki and i share the same interest in music, and he's sent some WMA's to me that were 64kbps quality... i compared, and didnt find any noticable quality loss... unless by quality you are talking about filesize... then its about half... :reading:

[goKi]

exactly, gerudo.. rip a cd as a 128kb/s MP3, then a 64k WMA, i can tell you that the WMA will sound alot better. Rip the same song at 192kb/s as MP3... you know you can rip WMA's at higher than 64k, but seeing as that is CD quality, all it does it just waste disk space.

[Gerudo]

Mr. 207: i beleive you can download M$'s WMA converter from www.windowsmedia.com

[AtmaWeapon]

I always thought Windows Media Player was able to do it.

And Gerudo, WMA's would be lower quality than MP3s if they were converted FROM mp3s. The same would not be true if you converted from CDA to WMA, but we're talking MP3 to WMA. Here's the reason:

Both WMA and MP3 are compression algorithms for sound. The way MP3 works (and I imagine WMA, as well) is it identifies sounds that are very low volume or difficult for humans to hear, and drops them. It looks for combinations of sounds where one sound drowns out another, and drops them. In other words, it cuts little things out of the music that are barely noticeable unless you compare them on good speakers. The higher the kbps, the less is cut out, so the truer the sound. The filesize reduction is the reason it is accepted (however, I must admit, it's approaching the point where MP3 is getting as large as CDA, what with 320kbps encoding and such.)

WMA likely works the same way, but with a far more efficient algorithm to allow higher quality at lower kbps rates.

So, if both algorithms are lossy (removes part of the data), then when you convert CDA to MP3 or CDA to WMA, you only have a data loss once. However, if you then convert MP3 to WMA, you are compressing an imperfect compressed copy of the original file, which means you will have more quality loss than if you had directly converted from CDA.

[Mr. 207]

Well I managed to find one that works pretty well.

I converted all my MP3's to WMA. The quality sounds just fine to me. I'm only doing this because I'm getting a new cd player that supports WMA. Converting my 192 mp3's to 96 WMA (which from what I understand is the equivilant), I can now fit my ENTIRE collection of music onto one cd, with alot of room to spare. (With MP3 format, I could only fit like half.)

[MottZilla]

Only if you encode at a really low KBPS will you notice a different or if you have very good ears.

And ya, microsoft gives away a WMA encoder. I however, hate WMA. However you have a practical use for them. I do not. I stick to MP3s.

[theplustwo]

there's a bonus pack from www.windowsmedia.com that has it. I think it's called windows media player bonus pack.

[The Savior]

Originally posted by Gerudo

im sorry, but you, sir, are narrowminded... WMA does NOT decrease the quality... i bet all your mp3's are 320kbps, right?
goki and i share the same interest in music, and he's sent some WMA's to me that were 64kbps quality... i compared, and didnt find any noticable quality loss... unless by quality you are talking about filesize... then its about half... :reading:
See Atma's reply.


Originally posted by goKi
exactly, gerudo.. rip a cd as a 128kb/s MP3, then a 64k WMA, i can tell you that the WMA will sound alot better. Rip the same song at 192kb/s as MP3... you know you can rip WMA's at higher than 64k, but seeing as that is CD quality, all it does it just waste disk space.

64k WMAs aren't CD quality.