|
starting to is 320kbps really good enough? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by blacknoizybox
u see, my friend, if i was to play out at Godskitchen or Dance Valley i am supposed to have enough cash to afford myself lisenced cds/vinyls...you know what i mean ;)
since im a total broke, i stick with mp3s, + sounds not that really... 8-)
cheers m8 |
if you listen to nothing but mp3s im not surprised you think they sound "not that ".
djs that play 192s in club environments are dirty & cheap. they sound crap. end of story. |
|
|
| Spirit5 |
| Ok this is what this debate comes down to in my opinion. If your going to just play at home or play small parties, then save yourself the cash and use MP3s, 192, 256 and 320. If your playing clubs and bigger parties and have already established yourself as a DJ, then I'de say go WAV, because you will probably be able to afford it and will almost need to considering it is the highest quality. Why not use it if you can afford it and are a pro? |
|
|
| mylespower |
all i have ever bought was wav files from day one... and all of my vinyls are ripped to wav files... its simply the way to go for the fullest and most rich sound that will count more so on bigger systems
i have done a little investigation regarding levels:
I bought a track in wav format and in 320kb mp3 format (the same track) off of beatport, I then played them both from the beginning (one in each chanel) and i had the gains at an identical spot
The wav file stayed at 0db
The mp3 would go beyond that into the "yellow" zone
then i went back and forth with the crossfader and the mp3 did sound a little harsher when i cranked it up
i have 2 mackie 350's and they go quite loud, loud enough to hear a difference and these are just PA speakers
that being said i was able to hear a slightly rougher sound on the mp3... the wav file still maintained the rich sound that i personally love and will continue to enjoy
as some other guy on this forum once said.... "Ride the Wav" |
|
|
| richg101 |
| quote: | Originally posted by AngusG
ripping from vinyl isn't just a matter of plugging in your mixer to your soundcard, you need a VERY good needle, a VERY good preamp, and a VERY good soundcard... it's probably not worth the hassle... but ig can be done...
a 320kbp mp3 should still sound fine... PC speakers are crap in there own right, while not as big as a 100k system, a 20k system is by no means crap... |
im assuming the rigs are both the same make. a funktion one rig set up by the designer @ 20'000 watts will not make it very easy to differenciate between the wav(1000+kbps) and a 320kbps. but say if the rig was very large then surely the difference will bicome more apparent?
like zooming in on a 3mpixel camera image is more pixelated than a 10mpixel... but the 10mpixel gets pixelated if you zoom in further.
im just interested cos its only recently that biggger distributors have started supplying wav as well as good ol' 320's.
can someone put it down in english the size sound rig a 320 is capable of being used on? ie. 20Kwatts rms to 100kwatts rms |
|
|
| Stu Cox |
Right now, I'd find it really hard to tell the difference between a 320k and a wav on just about any system. 192 is slightly more noticeable although at home it just sounds the same.
But I still go for the highest option available - wav if it's there, if not 320k mp3 but if they've only got 192k, it's more important to me to have the tune than whether it'll sound good when I play it at Global Gathering (currently not on the cards, chances of it ever being on the cards are stupidly slim, chances of me happing to want to play the tune I've got as a 192k mp3 are zero)
With technology going the way it is, we're getting towards a point where disk space and download times matter less and less so it's easier and easier to get high quality copies of things. I think when we get to a point where everyone listens to and plays wavs or similar, maybe even higher, quality (even set rips, mixes done by other djs etc - everything we listen to in mp3 at the moment) THEN we'll notice if someone suddenly puts on a 320k mp3. So I say strive for excellence - keep improving (within reason of course) whether you think you can tell the difference or not, with time we'll all become accustomed to higher quality and it's better for your ears too ;)
So back to the original question :p no, 320k mp3 isn't too low quality to play out - on a top-notch club system, when you mix into it (of course the best way to test the difference is to play it from one format then the other, but in a set situation you won't do that so any difference is going to be a lot less obvious anyway) you may lose a VERY SLIGHT amount of far bottom and far top end, but I think the shoddy mastering you get on a lot of tracks at the moment will have much more effect on how it sounds than whether you're playing a wav or a high-bitrate mp3. But as I say, that shouldn't necessarily stop you from buying wavs. |
|
|
| Stu Cox |
| quote: | Originally posted by richg101
can someone put it down in english the size sound rig a 320 is capable of being used on? ie. 20Kwatts rms to 100kwatts rms |
I personally wouldn't worry about any size. When you get to really large systems, you're going to be in a massive venue where so many other factors can come into play anyway. And the size of the rig doesn't determine the sound reproduction quality, it's just higher quality kit tends to be used for bigger rigs as otherwise at that volume it would sound horrible (loud distortion is much more noticable to your ears than quiet distortion!) |
|
|
| Vero |
| quote: | Originally posted by Rikki
I'd prefer wave as it hasnt been touched by anything and is exactly the way it left the studio.
|
haha, show me a CDJ that will play a 24/192 session and ill show you something that will play a track that "hasnt been touched by anything and is exactly the way is left the studio" |
|
|
| Rikki |
| quote: | Originally posted by Vero
haha, show me a CDJ that will play a 24/192 session and ill show you something that will play a track that "hasnt been touched by anything and is exactly the way is left the studio" |
I would assume what leaves the studio is a engineered and mastered DLT tape with 44.1KHz 16bit data on it heading by courier to the duplication plant to be pressed onto CD... |
|
|
| b i n k u n |
| quote: | Originally posted by Rikki
I would assume what leaves the studio is a engineered and mastered DLT tape with 44.1KHz 16bit data on it heading by courier to the duplication plant to be pressed onto CD... |
far from the truth. quite commonly, it's just a CD burnt at 16/44.1 from the producer. it may be mastered again before going to press, but that may just be some compression...
as for 320kbps vs wav on a large system, i seriously doubt you'll be able to tell the difference. mainly due to the fact that a large system is not necessarily a high quality system capable of reproducing perfectly across the frequency range. mp3 compression at 320 kbps will drop off frequencies below 20 Hz and above 18 kHz and then it will compress artefacts in between 20-20kHz, basically just dropping off quiet sound after the peaks and in between peaks. since a 100k system will be boosting the entire song ridiculously across the frequency range, i doubt you can notice the difference. and it is quite hard to listen for artefacts when things are hitting you at like 110 dB or more, not to mention 100k systems usually exist in large arenas where the delay will affect everything even more.
altho having never tested, i can't say for sure. but i can say in a studio environment, telling the difference between 320 and wav is near impossible. this i have tested. |
|
|
| Zild |
| Yeah I said it before in a club environment with massive sound you'll never tell the difference between a vinyl pressing and a 320mp3. Not unless you have an expensive oscilliscope for ears. |
|
|
| Rikki |
| quote: | Originally posted by b i n k u n
far from the truth. quite commonly, it's just a CD burnt at 16/44.1 from the producer. it may be mastered again before going to press, but that may just be some compression... |
Well it will be 44.1 anyway and I doubt any mastering or compression will be done in the toilet so that would be classed as leaving the "studio" at "44.1" |
|
|
| Spacey Orange |
| wav > 320. anyone that sells mp3s lower than that should be shot. |
|
|
|
|
