| Author
|
320 vs. wav
|
polly
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
203
Posted : Mar 20, 2009 12:06
|
This issue has been bugging me a lot 
IMO in dj use there is no difference if you use 320 mp3 or WAV, people are always saying that they can easily spot the difference on big sound system but i doubt it.
people say that u feel it on low frequencyes but aint it usually cut out on kick? what i know people usually cut out low frequencies from kick.
my experience of psy trance parties is that there is almoust never a perfect conditions, either sound system is crappy or space is not suitable for perfect music listening (echoes etc...) and the bigger the sound system gets, usually lower the sound quality gets.
so i'm ready for pepsi challenge wav vs. 320 mp3 on big sound system with anyone who wants to do it 
  http://www.myspace.com/polly_potb
http://www.miazu-polly.com
http://www.sangomarecords.com
http://www.peopleofthebutterflies.org |
|
|
|
~d2~
Inactive User
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
751
Posted : Mar 20, 2009 12:20
|
I agree with the sound system thing.
But I also listen to music at home through some nice monitors and headphones. So for me in those conditions wav is a better choice.
Later on if I get some time I will do a little test. |
|
|
|
polly
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
203
Posted : Mar 20, 2009 12:40
|
|
Ascension
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
170
Posts :
3642
Posted : Mar 20, 2009 14:20
|
I'd say in the end the only people that should worry about this matter are producers. Producers should be making their tracks of the highest quality from the start.
For DJing it is not nearly as big of an issue people as make it out to be since you are playing tracks over large sound systems (outside, in various venues that don't cater to getting the best sound out of a system, on a system not set up for psy, even on the most perfect setup in the most perfect venue the sound itself will not be perfect, etc).
http://soundcloud.com/ascensionsound
www.chilluminati.org - Midwest based psytrance group |
|
|
|
x-rayz
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
576
Posted : Mar 20, 2009 15:20
|
I would rather say both producers and djs should worry about it.. Cause personally I wanna have the best possible quality of mp3 I produce and also wanna have high quality encoded music for djing.. For now I stick to mp3 320 but if FLAC would be supported by serato I would immediately switch to that.. Currently, playing wavs is a bit too much..
http://www.facebook.com/xrayzproductions
http://www.myspace.com/xrayzproductions |
|
|
|
Ascension
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
170
Posts :
3642
Posted : Mar 20, 2009 17:08
|
I was saying I just don't think it's worth it for DJs to worry about playing wav vs 320kbps. They're gonna play whichever they can get their hands on. Basically, I wouldn't worry about not having a wav version of a track if I have a 320kbps mp3 version.
http://soundcloud.com/ascensionsound
www.chilluminati.org - Midwest based psytrance group |
|
|
|
x-rayz
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
576
Posted : Mar 20, 2009 17:57
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Mar 20, 2009 22:27
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-03-19 20:54, ~d2~ wrote:
Can anyone link me to some evidence of this 320kbps transparency.
|
|
I have posted a couple of links in earlier mp3 discussions here, but can't seem to find them in my bookmarks.
Those where to a couple of quite old tests:
One from DJ mag where they had some audio pro's trying out various formats at Fabric in London. As an example from that test 4 of 5 thought that 128kbps Vorbis sounded better than wav. It was not a very scientific test, but the only published on on a top-quality PA I have read.
Other tests was from some audiophile magazine as I recall, also testing various compression formats and monitoring on Nautilus speakers.
Also I seen some threads on hydrogenaudio about it, and that is really the place to search for or ask for information about audio codecs.
You have to dig far back in the past I guess though to find any test results for 320kbps vs wav though since it seems like most people there rather spend their time making tests where you actually have a chance to determine the quality of the algorithms.
Currently all the action, both when it comes to LAME development and ABX testing, is about lower bitrates.
Also if you dig here I made a test a few years back...then there was no-one who managed to tell even lower bitrates from wav (I think 190kbps VBR was the lowest rate used).
Quote:
|
x-rayz wrote:
That would just double the degradation of mp3, wouldn it?
|
|
An mp3 always have to be decoded before played. Most software will decode on the fly, but for ABX testing I'd do it in advance.
Same goes for DJ'ing...using mp3 or FLAC means extra strain on CPU and HD for decoding, so I always have all songs as wav regardless of the source. Disk space is cheap today, and the less distractions my laptop have to deal with during the set the better.
(``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
Upavas
Upavas
Started Topics :
150
Posts :
3315
Posted : Mar 21, 2009 09:38
|
|
Psynthex
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
41
Posts :
677
Posted : Mar 21, 2009 10:44
|
|
Ascension
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
170
Posts :
3642
Posted : Mar 21, 2009 18:55
|
|
Psynthex
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
41
Posts :
677
Posted : Mar 21, 2009 21:21
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-03-21 18:55, Ascension wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2009-03-21 10:44, Psynthex wrote:
I really like Spindrift
|
|
GET EM!!
|
|
and so are you
Psynthex [ Vertikal Records ]
http://www.myspace.com/psynthex
Minniq [ Parked Below Records ]
Frequent Pill [ Ultimae Records ] |
|
|
|
CRYSIS
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
11
Posts :
154
Posted : Mar 21, 2009 22:04
|
|
Mp3 never cut down the low end of a song. What it does is it cuts the high end, about 16 - 18 KhZ. I think at about 128 mp3, it cuts the highs at about 16khz, but 320 obviously is more, maybe about 17 or 18 khz. Only way to tell the difference is on good headphones or decent set of near field speakers, not on a loud PA system. |
|
|
|
Upavas
Upavas
Started Topics :
150
Posts :
3315
Posted : Mar 22, 2009 01:48
|
|
Kane
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
23
Posts :
1772
Posted : Mar 22, 2009 15:03
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-03-19 20:54, ~d2~ wrote:
Can anyone link me to some evidence of this 320kbps transparency.
|
|
No, but I can tell you that at 320 VBR adds around -19dB of compression noise..I have reverb sends lower than that.
I haven't seen any of these studies that are constantly mentioned.
I can't tell the difference with something I haven't heard before, since there are plenty of tracks (electronic and not) that are intentionally dirty. MP3 compression doesn't have any kind of distinct character, it just sounds like the original track with a ton of noise and some glitches. But I can tell the difference immediately back to back during the same track.
You believe in the users?
Yeah, sure. If I don't have a user, then who wrote me? |
|
|
|
