COMREX BRIK -WILL IT ACT AS WINDOWS MEDIA ENCODER?

[joshzz]

We're currently using WINDOWS MEDIA ENCODER on a computer to process our internet stream.

I would prefer to send a stream directly without having to fuss with a computer dedicated specifically to encoding into Windows Media Player.

I know Barix units can be set up for MP3 encoding but that's not going to get me where I need to be.

Will the COMREX BRIK take an on-air music and convert it internally with an encoder for windows media player? thanks!! josh

 

[SRP]

From http://www.comrex.com/products/briclink.html

"Streaming Server Mode
BRIC-Link can function as a streaming server, delivering multiple streams to computer based media players that support HE-AAC (also known as aacPlus). HE-AAC has the advantage of delivering good quality at very low network bandwidth. As an example, BRIC-Link can deliver more than 40 stereo streams over a T1 Internet connection when using the HE-AACv2 24Kb/s encoder. Tested players include WinAmp, VLC and Windows Media Player with Orban/Coding Technologies aacPlus Plugin.

BRIC-Link also offers the ability to act as a source feed for both SHOUTcast and Icecast servers. With a single BRIC-Link, you can expand your radio presence to the Internet without the need for a dedicated PC."

So there you go. It encodes in AAC, not in Windows Media. If you're using a Windows Media Server to stream your station you can't use BRIC to encode it.

 

[joshzz]

The majority of radio station streams on the internet are produced by Windows Media. Why not encode to this? josh

PS: Any speculation as to why they chose another format? :'(

 

[gtomas]

When talking about streaming, the answer is very simple - because HE-AAC (also known as aacPlus) for low bitrates and AAC for high bitrates, are the best codecs in existance today. IOW, they provide the best audio quality at given bitrate compared to other codecs. WMA is inferior.

You say "the majority of streams are produced by Windows Media" but that is your assumption and it might be very well wrong. I don't have the research and the exact numbers, but for one thing HE-AAC and AAC are MPEG standards and as such supported on all platforms (Win, Mac, linux/unix and almost all mobile devices including iPhone and Android) while WMA is a proprietary format tied only to Microsoft operating systems on PCs and a few mobile devices. By far the most popular technology for delivering streaming media today Flash also supports HE-AAC and AAC, while it doesn't WMA. Flash is also cross-platform compatible, runs in a browser and does not need to have installed player such as Windows Media Player or QuickTime or whatnot.


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[chriscollins]

Goran, his assumption is quite correct. Most stations do use Windows Media to encode their streams. It is a 'pretty' good codec and quite easy to interface with in regards to tagging, etc... About the only stations I see offering other encodes are the public ones who have grant money to play with. Our public station codes in wma, aac plus, shoutcast, and believe it or not, the old standard... Real. All modern ad insertion software is written to run under windows, as well. Personally, the only other stream I would even entertain is aac, as it will easily get you on iphones/ipads.

 

[gtomas]

Chris, I'm not denying that Windows Media is popular because it's built-in Windows and forced by Microsoft. But it's far, far from being the best in any way, from audio quality over encoders and metadata to stream robustness. And although you maybe surrounded with mostly WM streams (I assume you are a in USA) please take into account this is only your perception.

For the technical accuracy, stream metadata is part of the streaming format and protocol and has nothing to do with audio codec. It is just as easy to interface metadata with HE-AAC or AAC encoders as it is with WM. In fact, some HE-AAC and AAC encoders such as Omnia AX/E or Orban Opticodec have far superior metadata interfacing capabilities than does WM encoder (or now Microsoft Expression).

"Pretty good" can be pretty bad, depending to the actual WMA codec you are using. If you are using anything other than WMA Pro 10, the audio quality will be far inferior. I wrote an article a while ago for Radio Guide that explains the benefits of HE-AAC that you might be interested in: http://www.gorantomas.com/?p=480


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[comrex]

I agree with Goran that AAC is superior,and with others that WMA is more ubiquitous. The reason BRIC-link streams only AAC is that the streaming function is ancillary to the box's primary function,which is low-delay pt-pt connections. Now Windows media player 12 decodes AAC just fine, so once everybody upgrades to Windows 7 we can all live in harmony.
Tom Hartnett
Comrex

 

[joshzz]

I know people that have already dropped Windows 7 and gone back to WINDOWS XP. This also happened with Vista - lots of fanfare by Microsoft and then the reality that they've delivered another pooor operating system.

With that said, could it be possible that Microsoft will be forced to deliver a WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER VERSION 12 FOR WINDOWS XP?

josh

 

[bigtom101]

I know people that have already dropped Windows 7 and gone back to WINDOWS XP. This also happened with Vista - lots of fanfare by Microsoft and then the reality that they've delivered another pooor operating system.

With that said, could it be possible that Microsoft will be forced to deliver a WINDOWS MEDIA PLAYER VERSION 12 FOR WINDOWS XP?

josh

Not to start a flamewar, but the only software I've run into that won't run on 7 are programs that were coded poorly and made with only XP in mind. And if you are running 7 Professional or above, you can run a virtual XP machine to get more life out of your older software. I use this to generate MusicGen logs on my one 7 box.

All the 7 installs I've done were done in under 30 minutes with no drivers needed to be found. - much quicker & easier than XP. Some of my programs don't like the way MS redesigned the way 7/Vista handle audio...but XP is 10 years old at this point. Time to use newer software that can take advantage of the hardware out there. I've found replacement programs easily...and if you cant, there's the virtual XP mode.

Vista was dreck - but 7 I love. Using it, then going back to the XP/Win2k boxes at work, really shows how old those OS's are.

 

[gtomas]

Now Windows media player 12 decodes AAC just fine, so once everybody upgrades to Windows 7 we can all live in harmony.

Yes, after literally years of stubbornly pushing their own technology it looks like Microsoft couldn't ignore the popularity and quality of H.264 video codec and AAC audio codec anymore. However, just as with their Expression encoder I'm expecting they will only support AAC and not HE-AAC (aacPlus). Which in a way is fine - if you keep your bitrates at or above 96 kbps, the AAC is the codec to go with. We shall see...


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[comrex]

WMP12 decodes HE-AAC just fine. There used to be separate licensing requirements for the HE portion from the patent holders but that has all been consolidated.

Most pros I talk to think Windows 7 is a vast improvement and a solid OS. I would not expect a WMP12 under a legacy OS.

Tom Hartnett
Comrex

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

Thank you, folks. This thread has been interesting and helpful. Today I am primarily a consumer of streaming, not a producer. I have reasonably strong computer skills and experience. I have a home studio for editing and voice-overs. I put church podcasts on-line. What I am trying to say is: I am not an "all thumbs" consumer of audio. And if I get on the phone with one of you guys to troubleshoot, I can speak the language. And the main thing I want to say: Radio stations are doing a helter-skelter low-grade amateur job of designing their streams... selecting their protocols.

As I scan the web and decide I would like to hear this station or that station... probably half the sites I go to WILL NOT PRODUCE SOUND on my system, and help and hints are almost non existent. Maybe one radio station in 25 (probably less) gives any information about what technology they are using. (Links to tutorials about the protocol/codec they are using just do not appear on their websites.) When I can't get them, I don't have the first clue for beginning my trouble-shooting. I can't get on a forum and say: I am trying to receive the stream of station WZZZ. They are using the following protocol/codec. What should I look for in my system that may be flawed on my end.

What I have never, never ever observed on a radio station website that should probably be "standard equipment":

We are unable to provide technical support to individual users. If you are unable to receive our audio stream please click here and leave us a message so that we can monitor the success of our choice of systems and our maintenance of those systems.

If a station routinely received e-mail traffic week after week from people reporting their inability to "tune in" the stream, that would probably be a good hint that you installed the wrong technology.

 

[comrex]

Completely agree with your comments GRC, but to be realistic, I doubt any station is capable of providing individual streaming support to listeners. But a macro indication of how many listeners are successful would be valuable.

The real villain here is the media players and their behavior. All PCs default to WMP for streams, and Microsoft's early attempts to corner the market by not including competing codecs has hurt the cause. Along with that, virtually any other player you install will try to snatch the settings to be the default streaming decoder as well, regardless of whether they support the format well.

If I were providing streaming support for a station, I'd probably try to post clearly that users having trouble should download free versions of VLC or WinAMP, (both of which provide excellent cross-platform streaming support) and provide links and clear instructions on how to set them up to be the default stream player. That would probably work until the next time iTunes upgrades itself on the system, anyway.

 

[gtomas]

I've been repeating this for a while now, but...

The best way to do streaming to desktop PCs these days is via Flash player embedded in the web page. No separate player need - WMP, WinAmp, VLC or other. No installation needed - provided you have at least once visited YouTube, you have Flash installed (according to research Flash has 99% of penetration). Supports AAC and HE-AAC (and H.264). Last but not least - your streams are cross platform compatible and users can listen to you (or watch you) whether they are on PC, Mac or Unix/Linux.


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[comrex]

except on iPhones, iPod touches and iPads

 

[SRP]

For that you can easily put up a "second" stream and tell iDevice users to "click here". Simple as that.

As to the OP's question - what's the dilemma with running a separate computer for WME? Just get yourself one of those fleapower PCs (like a Lenovo Q110), strip down the XP installation and run the encoder on that. If you do it right it will be VERY reliable.

 

[gtomas]

except on iPhones, iPod touches and iPads

That's why I said desktops

For mobile, Flash is available for Android since this summer and for Apple devices (like SRP says) you do need to set a separate stream. The encoding side can be the same. Which is not that problematic to do (read: easy and free).

On the other hand, you may want to go with Silverlight instead of Flash with the same benefits of not needing the stand-alone player, web browser integration and being cross-platform compatible (including Apple devices). However, Silverlight has significantly lower penetration compared to Flash in the desktop PC arena and it also looks like Microsoft is going to slowly fade it out not being able to establish it as a serious competition to Flash.

Now there's also HTML5, but that's another story and the future is still unclear on that one...


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[littlejohn]

What about standalone 'net radios' and the upcomingauto net players.... do any of them play Flash?

 

[RolfTaylor]

I've been repeating this for a while now, but...

The best way to do streaming to desktop PCs these days is via Flash player embedded in the web page. No separate player need - WMP, WinAmp, VLC or other. No installation needed - provided you have at least once visited YouTube, you have Flash installed (according to research Flash has 99% of penetration). Supports AAC and HE-AAC (and H.264). Last but not least - your streams are cross platform compatible and users can listen to you (or watch you) whether they are on PC, Mac or Unix/Linux.


Regards,
Goran Tomas

I guess some things never change. When pioneered streaming we found out very early on that Flash provided cross platform MP3 decoding. I remember we were pretty excited to have them as a "quasi-partner" in those exciting early days.

One other aside. I have it from an extremely reliable source that when Microsoft licensed MP3 they got a partial license that only included lower bit rate, because they were confident their own tech would prevail at higher bit rates. It cost them many millions to license those bit rates a few years later.

Then again, mistakes happen - Western Union refused the Bell Telephone patent for a very low price! Within 2 years they realized their mistake and was paying Edison big money to come up with ways around that patent (ever heard of the chalk telephone transmitter?).

cheers

Rolf

 

[gunterm]

The backend for Flash streaming is almost always HE-AAC v2, I know CC uses that for the stations I've listened to.

WMP plays mp3 streams so if the Comrex will do that just feed a 128k mp3, it should sound pretty good at that rate.