hey everyone,

thanks for all the good feedback, i appreciate the comments. i'll give it a shot and see what the results are.

It all depends on the sample. If it's going to be the cornerstone of your track and has a lot of bass, people may be able to tell, but in the end, are people going to be listening to the final product in WAV or 320kbps mp3?

Just my opinion but I wouldn't be concerned at all with sampling something that is 320kbps regardless of what it is.

___________________
Please send your demos to [email protected]
For more information, please visit www.myspace.com/olympikrecords

quote:

Originally posted by mysticalninja ah interesting. why is it mp3s don't go above 320? and cds dont go above 1411 for that matter?

What Diginut said, pretty much. There are a bunch of different compression formats, at various sizes. And some of them (as Diginut also said) are lossless, meaning the audio is identical to the original, with a smaller file size.

CDs in the vast majority of cases are 16 bit, 44.1 kHz stereo audio. In the WAV format, this works out at 1411.2 kbps. If you adjust the parameters, this rate will change - a mono file will be 705.6 kbps. If you up the parameters to 32 bit/192 kHz, the kbps will be a lot higher.

If you sample at 320 you can always just rebuild the thing if its gonna be released.

Realistically, bit and sample rate reduction are legitimate effects which are often used, so really you're just giving it a bit of that.

Personally I'd prefer to sample off vinyl or tape or radio to get some nice analogy grunge on the sample. Digital grunge isn't the same to me, but thats just personal preference, and probably on one element isn't really relevent.

___________________
New Mix: March 2010 Promo
Soundcloud|Facebook