Wav files with 1411 kbps and 1536 kbps.

[SyncroScales]

I was just wondering if anyone deals with or has trouble with some different types of Wav files.

I am use to working with Wav that has 1411kbps, 44100 Hz and is 16bits.

When using Action! (for Screen Capture and Audio Capture), DVDFab (audio export) and some other video editors I noticed some are outputting Wave files as 1536 kbps with 48000 Hz.

Some programs and/or Windows Vista gives error messages about these files. But I could do some work with them or re-export them as a typical wav.

I read about Wave 64-bit, Broadcast Wav and that Wav files could have different formats (I don't know the word, but eg: 48000 Hz). Does anyone else use Wav? If so what types and are there video, audio, music production or dj software that does not reject the untypical Wav codec?

I think the 1536 kbps Wav files sound better.

[racer-x]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WAV

[El Heggunte]

Some programs and/or Windows Vista gives error messages about these files.

Probably they have 'non-compliant' OR 'unusual' RIFF headers.

Several applications like to write "fancy"/useless stuff in the WAV header (and/or footer), and the poorly-coded applications stupidly complain about what they do not "understand", instead of simply ignoring it.

[Hoser Rob]

I don't understand why you'd be "used to" wav files with a bit rate of 1411kbps. Is that the birth date of a revered ancestor?

Wav files don't (and shouldn't) have a preferred sample rate. Generally in video and games it's 48K, in redbook CD it's 44.1K.

I think elheggunte is right about the error messages. That's unfortunately not hard to get into because in windows it's too easy to have flaky codecs installed without your knowledge.

Wav is not really 'untypical', though the only time I'd usually see it is if I rip a CD.

There's no particular reason the 1536kbps files should sound better than the 1411kbps based just on the bit rate. That's not much difference and there are too many other factors.

The one I'd suspect is that your windows mixer setup is resampling all 44.1K audio to 48. That's actually the default. So the 48K ones are sounding better. Just a guess though. That's very annoying for those of us who want to optimize music over video sound. You can get around that.

[pandy]

There's no particular reason the 1536kbps files should sound better than the 1411kbps based just on the bit rate. That's not much difference and there are too many other factors.

They can sound better as for example noise shaping may used different dither characteristic and provide lower weighted noise level and/or distortions.

[hello_hello]

I don't understand why you'd be "used to" wav files with a bit rate of 1411kbps. Is that the birth date of a revered ancestor?

You are aware all stereo 16 bit wave files with a sampling frequency of 44.1k have a bitrate of 1411 kbps? And all stereo 16 bit 48k wave files are 1536 kbps? If you're "used to" 44.1k wave files how can you not be used to 1411 kbps wave files?

44.1 x 16 x 2 = 1411.2
48 x 16 x 2 = 1536

Wav files don't (and shouldn't) have a preferred sample rate. Generally in video and games it's 48K, in redbook CD it's 44.1K.

Given it's capture software capable of capturing your desktop or games as video etc, wouldn't it therefore be logical for the accompanying audio to be 48k? It could then be converted to a lossy format, such as 48k AC3, without having to resample it.

I think elheggunte is right about the error messages. That's unfortunately not hard to get into because in windows it's too easy to have flaky codecs installed without your knowledge.

I don't think he was referring to flaky codecs.
He's probably right about the headers though. I'm not sure what else it could be.

SyncroScales,
I'd try converting the wave files to wave files. Lots of audio programs should be able to do it. You can load an audio file into a foobar2000 playlist, right click and convert to wave. Or import the wave file into an audio editor and export/save it again as a new wave file. You can probably do that with Audacity. Or there's a list of audio editors here I found via Google. The process should be lossless as long as you convert/export to at least 16 bit wave (same sampling frequency). Mostly, if you import a 16 bit 48k wave file into an audio editor, when exporting to wave it'll default to 16 bit, 48k anyway. Maybe the output wave file will be one the "problem" programs are happy to play with.
The error messages though..... if they're specific error messages, posting the details would probably help track down the cause.

[transporterfan]

Many audio programs reject 48k out of hand (Burrrn, cdrtfe). I have to convert to 44.1k using AoA Audio Extractor to burn an audio cd.
Most pro DVD equipment (mixers, digital recording equipment etc) are geared up for 48K, TV broadcast equipment too.
I don't believe there is anything wrong here. I think that DVDFab and 'other video editors' are just exporting at what they have been
programmed to export; what's considered to be the most compatible audio format across the board for DVD/video.
Change it if you want/need something specific.

[hello_hello]

Many audio programs reject 48k out of hand (Burrrn, cdrtfe). I have to convert to 44.1k using AoA Audio Extractor to burn an audio cd.

That surprises me given DVD/Bluray audio (accompanying video) is 48k, so converting it to a lossless format to work with it wouldn't exactly be unusual. Although one of the programs you mentioned is years old and they're both dedicated to CD burning (I'm pretty sure VideoCD audio is 44.1k), but for current, more general purpose audio programs you'd pretty much expect support for all the common/standard sampling rates.

[Cornucopia]

Yes, S/VCD audio is 44.1kHz. DVD-Audio can also optionally be 44.1.

But most major audio editors and DAWs have supported both for 2 decades, and the only general audio/video apps I see that have trouble with either sample rate are poorly designed/written ones (this does NOT count apps such as AudioCD burning where there is only 1 valid samplerate).

Because the WAV format has been around for so long (~25years now), and has undergone expansion to its spec (WAVEFORMAT, WAVEFORMAT_EX, WAVEFORMAT_EXTENSIBLE, BWF, R64), there are apps written for earlier versions (written without enough foresight) that cannot properly handle fully valid "newer" variations. No biggie - just rewrap it into a format compatible with the app, or use a more modern/robust app.

There are also some transforming utilities out there to assist. Let me know if you have a specific recurring need; I can track one down in my app archive library.

Scott