TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- DJ Booth
-- 320 Mp3 vs. wav
Pages (4): [1] 2 3 4 »

320 Mp3 vs. wav

I tried searching before making this thread. If I missed something please paste a link. I was curious what the consensus is on a 320 mp3 vs. wav. I know wav is lossless and mp3 is lossy codec. Basically is it worth the extra dollar on beatport or would I be fine with a 320?

I mean, I wouldn't know... I've never played anything live, but from reading around here, a lot of people would say that 320 is good enough. I mean if you just play at home and maybe a friends house now and then, and I've heard people say that 320 is fine in clubs too.. then you should be fine.

for the most part it really doesn't matter, and a lot of quality issues depend on the reproductive quality of the system your playing on...so you're really only as good as the speakers allow. that said, on studio monitors for dj'ing or production you can certainly here a qualitative difference, but its a very personal choice of whether that merits paying nearly double what you would (in some cases) for an entire collection of tracks in .wav. personally i used to buy exclusively .wavs for a while and eventually settled for 320mp3 when some of the vendors i started buying from no longer offered wav.

320's for me... id buy wavs if all the download shops offered them... i kinda like consistency... everything i buy has to be one format, and since wavs arent yet a standard offering i will stick with 320 for now. maybe that is poor reasoning but whateva

I think that 320 is plenty for any club. I know for a fact that a Very Big Dj gave me a bunch of cds and they where all 320. He plays at many clubs, pacha etc so if its fine for him I think 320 is good enough for everyone else

You could play a 192kbps MP3 in any club you'll ever play and nobody will be able to tell the difference.

Anyone who says they can is either:

A. Lying

B. A Mutant

I'll vote for B then

I only buy WAV's.

I think they sound better, put a WAV next to a 320 MP3 of the same song, sure they sound very "similar", but the MP3 is missing so much high and low feeling and clarity.

I used to spin vinyl which used to cost me $20 a record (after shipping), now I pay $2.50 for a WAV ....... it's not even a consideration for me.

Maybe you need to look your equipment, how much did you spend on it? If you spent $1000 then I'd say 320 is fine. If you spent $15,000 then I'd say go with a WAV.

I vote WAV, i just wish more shops provided them

I don't know, I find it possible to differentiate on certain tracks which have a characteristic crispness and clarity in high quality.

I suppose in most clubs they just destroy the sound anyways with booming bass and the sound is complicated and obfuscated by the sound of vibration in the actual material of the place, and usually you're under the influence and it doesn't matter.

Playing a 192 kbps mp3 for me is like watching a movie at a theater without corrective lenses. (I'm a bit near sighted)

I generally play 320 kbps mp3s except for select tracks which I really love and own in wav format or original productions in wav.

mostly though it's because i collect music and i like to collect it in the best form affordable. i also buy vinyl. you can easily tell the difference in headphones


EDIT: we should do some sort of test where a mix is recorded with tracks of variable quality - wav, 320, 192 and see who notices what.

like an ID contest haha

quote:

Originally posted by Mmanu I'll vote for B then

I've never once seen a person who could tell the difference - it's all a bunch of bullshit, douchebag "my e-penor is bigger than yours" nonsense.

If we really wanted to play "let's drop some names," () I'd gladly pass along the names of several big name DJ's who play illegally obtained, 192kbps MP3's several nights a week - but at the end of the day, I'll take personal experience over anything else.

99.9% of people in a club can't tell. Period. It's a fact that there's no use in arguing.

Edit: I think those of you who claim to be able to tell this huge difference (especially in a club) really need to check the source of your MP3's.

I didn't say huge.
192= less bass, less highs, muddy mediums. People can't tell the difference, because they usually don't run a Pepsi challenge in clubs...
the source for my mp3s is 24 bit/192 Khz, mastered on a TL audio 48 channel, tascam digital recorders/Macintosh. Thanks for your great insight, please have a cookie

quote:

Originally posted by Mmanu I didn't say huge. 192= less bass, less highs, muddy mediums. People can't tell the difference, because they usually don't run a Pepsi challenge in clubs... the source for my mp3 is 24 bit/192 Khz. Thanks for your great insight, please have a cookie

I could really give fuck all if just because you can notice the difference on your headphones at home so you assume you can in a club.

quote:

Originally posted by RJT You could play a 192kbps MP3 in any club you'll ever play and nobody will be able to tell the difference. Anyone who says they can is either: A. Lying B. A Mutant

I would agree. but it comes down to what system the club has and in what state of quality the 192 is.

quote:

Originally posted by montana I would agree. but it comes down to what system the club has and in what state of quality the 192 is.

My post was made assuming it was the highest possible quality 192 kbps (i.e. purchased from a reputable source) - you can't polish a turd after all

And honestly - I don't presume to have been to every club in the world, but I've been to quite a few across the globe, and not one of them was in such a fashion that it was remotely near to listening to something on a home system/headphones/etc.

quote:

Originally posted by RJT 99.9% of people in a club can't tell. Period. It's a fact that there's no use in arguing.

Can you provide a source for this "fact" please?

I'd say it's purely down to the individual TBH, some people can tell the difference and some can't - it's not a big deal really.

At the end of the day, we're human after all, and each of our ears are slightly different to the next person.

like I said,

quote:

Originally posted by agentdansmith Can you provide a source for this "fact" please?

Years of experience, and not just my own, but those of clubbers and DJ's alike who have far more years on their feet than I do.

Honestly - the whole audiophile debate was just made for the internet, because all the little boys and girls can sit here and say "OMG It's such a HUGE difference" knowing full well that their claim will never be verified in a real world setting.

For that reason alone it's really no use to even argue about it.

That guy's funny actually

what part of don't you understand ?

I think you would be surprised actually.
I think a lot depends on how well you know the system to start with but on some of the systems I play on a regular basis I believe I can tell. As I said, it depends on how intimate you are with the sound system though.
Could I sell the difference between a 320 and a 192 on the same system... probably not.

I have always been able to tell the difference between CDs and vinyl on those systems. Call me a mutant if you want but I bet I'm not alone.

That said, I don't think the average clubber would notice or care if they did, and I don't think the difference is so great that it has a negative effect on the overall outcome anyway.

If people stop dancing because you have playing a low quality MP3 then you know you are playing something that sounds so shit even your deaf uncle could tell.

In answer to the original question, does a wav sound better than a MP3, sure it does. Does it make a big difference on the dancefloor, no it doesn't and it should never stop you from playing them. For me 192s are fine too.


Cheers
Nem

one of the reasons i don't play 192 kbps mp3s is because i like to record my live sets even if i don't share them, and i like the audio quality to be consistent for later listening.

I'm sure there must be some people who can tell the difference, but I'd be willing to bet that even the majority of those who say they can would think a 128kbps mp3 with pre recorded vinyl pops and distortion sounds better than an uncompressed wav file if they weren't informed of the source in advance.

All you are gonna get are mixed opinions on the subject.

Its clear that there are the few bitter mp3 dj's in here trying to justify all their asinine mp3 purchases. in my opinion an mp3 is worth zero whatever the quality. That doesn't meen it wont sound good in a club, it just meens that i wouldn't pay anything for mp3 music.

quote:

Originally posted by starboy All you are gonna get are mixed opinions on the subject. Its clear that there are the few bitter mp3 dj's in here trying to justify all their asinine mp3 purchases. in my opinion an mp3 is worth zero whatever the quality. That doesn't meen it wont sound good in a club, it just meens that i wouldn't pay anything for mp3 music.

Sounds like you're just trying to justify not buying your music.

quote:

Originally posted by Project-K I'm sure there must be some people who can tell the difference, but I'd be willing to bet that even the majority of those who say they can would think a 128kbps mp3 with pre recorded vinyl pops and distortion sounds better than an uncompressed wav file if they weren't informed of the source in advance.

As a DJ your ears aren't as well trained in comparison to when you enter the world of producing. Then your ears come alive and you instantly recognise what you would choose to boost and how the sound is percieved over all. It really does change your whole perception.

You also develop in instant recognition for mud, i.e. the effect you get on lower quality MP3s. Digital mp3 compression doesn't handle bass particularly well.

Cheers
Nem

quote:

Originally posted by Project-K Sounds like you're just trying to justify not buying your music.

Your right it does sound like that after i just re read it.

Fortunately all the music i want is available at beatport with wav's i have a nice and very loud system at home where i play my music so i love to hear it exactly the way it was intended without any loss of quality. But every once in awhile beatport won't have a track im after and i have to buy 320k elsewhere and it just doesn't seem to sound as good, i couldn't imagine spending all that money on mp3's and not being satisfied with the way it sounds.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.