TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- digital : wav. vs. MP3
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

digital : wav. vs. MP3

whats better?

Quality? .Wav
Size? .mp3

quote:

Originally posted by Ian Quality? .Wav Size? .mp3

/thread

quote:

Originally posted by Ian Quality? .Wav Size? .mp3

This one of those 'motion in the ocean' kind of things, then?

But still of its an mp3 in 320 its still really good quality.

What about FLAC?

wav is better quality but personally i cant tell the difference between a 320k mp3 and wav alot of people cant either.

better for what?

quote:

Originally posted by Spacey Orange better for what?

Picking grapes.

It depends a lot on the sound system too. If you're talking home listening on a pair of computer speakers, you're not gonna be able to hear much difference at all between 320 and WAV. On a (good) club system, most def., especially if you drop lower than 320.

Good God, this again?

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Mystery Picking grapes.

quote:

Originally posted by sleepydragon wav is better quality but personally i cant tell the difference between a 320k mp3 and wav alot of people cant either.

No one can. That's the point.

MP3 is a lossy compression format. It provides a representation of pulse-code modulation-encoded (PCM) audio data in a much smaller size by discarding portions that are considered less important to human hearing. A number of techniques are employed in MP3 to determine which portions of the audio can be discarded, including psychoacoustics. MP3 audio can be compressed with different bit rates, providing a range of tradeoffs between data size and sound quality.

quote:

Originally posted by body125z MP3 is a lossy compression format. It provides a representation of pulse-code modulation-encoded (PCM) audio data in a much smaller size by discarding portions that are considered less important to human hearing. A number of techniques are employed in MP3 to determine which portions of the audio can be discarded, including psychoacoustics. MP3 audio can be compressed with different bit rates, providing a range of tradeoffs between data size and sound quality.

For a while I thought you finally learned how to type.

quote:

Originally posted by thoughtlessjex No one can. That's the point.

Depends on what you are listening and with what. If you have good DA-converters and good headphones, it will be easy.

quote:

Originally posted by thoughtlessjex No one can. That's the point.

quote:

Originally posted by jupiterone /thread

pretty much yeah

Unless your a Pro-DJ playing at clubs on a regular basis and festivals, there is no need to spend the extra money on WAVs (it's a waste). 320 kbps MP3s are just as good as noted, especially if your just a bedroom/hobbyist DJ, play house-parties or just listen to the tracks at home or in your car.

quote:

Originally posted by paulandrews For a while I thought you finally learned how to type.

welcome to [[ LINK REMOVED ]]
I Win

quote:

Originally posted by body125z welcome to [[ LINK REMOVED ]] I Win

Lol, no wonder that definition sounded familiar.

The difference between a 320k MP3 and a WAV are barely noticeable for most average listeners. WAV is always better, but due to file size and length of time it takes to download a single one, it's just easier to work with an MP3.

quote:

Originally posted by humilis Depends on what you are listening and with what. If you have good DA-converters and good headphones, it will be easy.

You also would need to play it at volumes far too loud to be safe for your hearing for sounds in those ranges to be audible. I love it when people say they can hear the difference, because generally it means they won't a few years down the road.

Hopefully with advancing internet speeds and the falling cost of storage, we won't see these threads in a few years as wav's will be the standard and MP3s simply wont be sold anymore.

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