|
320 Mp3 vs. wav (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Spoonz |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
Whoa whoa whoa there sally pants, who started a My club's sound system is better than your clubs sound system"?
:stongue:
In case you missed it, roughly that was you.
Read, comprehend, then post.
And might I add how tiring it gets to read peoples "defer to Nem, he knows all" attitudes on here. I get it, he's a pro and all of you DJ booth fellows wish to be just like him - but for s sake, some of the people are claiming in this thread is utter nonsense.
Discussing whether or not you can tell the difference between a 192, 320, and WAV at home, and whether or not you can tell the difference at 99% of the clubs in the world are two entirely different things.
It'd be nice if instead of people just reacting, they actually read the thread and thought about reality, instead of just attempting to sound smart on the internets. |
100% agree'd |
|
|
| Nemesis44 |
| quote: | Originally posted by RJT
Whoa whoa whoa there sally pants, who started a My club's sound system is better than your clubs sound system"?
:stongue:
In case you missed it, roughly that was you.
Read, comprehend, then post.
And might I add how tiring it gets to read peoples "defer to Nem, he knows all" attitudes on here. I get it, he's a pro and all of you DJ booth fellows wish to be just like him - but for s sake, some of the people are claiming in this thread is utter nonsense.
Discussing whether or not you can tell the difference between a 192, 320, and WAV at home, and whether or not you can tell the difference at 99% of the clubs in the world are two entirely different things.
|
It is undoubtedly very flattering to have people have faith in oneself, but as RJT states, I would still whole heartedly recomend that people always try and experience and test what they read and formulate their own opinions, which many of you do, I'm pleased to say. :)
Vero, thank you for the kind words. :)
RJT, I think what you are saying is correct for the most part and possibly for a lot of people too. But please note, that in my posts I have stated that they key factor is how well you know the sounds system. I mean on a weekly level for over a year for example. :) (I put the smile there by the way just so you know that I have my laid back 'discussing mode' on and not ranting. ;)
Generally.
What people have to ask themselves is this. How many of you can actually diffentiate between a stong production in terms of mastering and one that isn't so strong? The chances are that not only will some people not know the difference but there will be some disagreement between what is considered good and what is not.
It's a similar situation here and there are things to be considered, if you read back to my posts, I still think that the difference between formats can be heard, but I still stress, YOUR LEVEL OF INTIMACY WITH THE SOUNDS SYSTEM IS A KEY FACTOR. How many of you out there who claim you can't here the difference actually play on the same system on a regular basis, how many of you for that matter actually take a walk of the club before you go on to get an idea of how you should EQ the sound to make yourself sound better than the guy before you?
You can tell a good DJ because not only does the music take a different direction but the quality of the sound should pick up, sadly not too many DJs do this these days.
People are so hell bent on what they are going to mix they sometimes miss the finer points. But for the finer points you have to train your ears.
I just have to say though, that for people to say that it can't be done is barmy I can tell on systems I know both when I'm playing and when others are. Can it be done to 100% accuracy... well I don't know, not sure I could. But then mixmeister can't key well enough to be reliable in my book yet people swear by it... go figure he he.
Cheers
Nem |
|
|
| Clovis |
The fact is, there are so many more variables going into the sound quality at a club, with all the different amps, wires, different speakers, and various tuning systems, with their myriad settings that I'll have to agree with RJT (and the extception Nem has pointed out). Not to mention that the QUALITY of the mp3 or wav matter as well. You can record a track in wav but if it has production and mastering then it wont matter.
What might SOUND like a lesser bit rate track could just be poor mastering or a poor copy.
But on very well tuned Funktion 1 (such as the setup at ICE in Las Vegas, which had a computer controlled tuning system and a perfect four stack setup on a square floor) I think I might be able to tell the difference between two identical tracks in 192 and one in wav...but in the middle of the set, it would be a stretch.
The difference between 320 and wav is negligable for DJing purposes.
However, when I edit tracks or make mashups I always start with the wav files. |
|
|
| Spirit5 |
| quote: | Originally posted by amdmaxx
I hope u r joking..
Terabytes hard drives are like $200, you can play neverending 200000 year set with 320kbps mp3s from it.. Storage is CHEAP these days..
Even Solid state Flash hard drives are coming down in price.. |
I haven't seen any Terabyte HDs, well around here...for $200. Most are $500 on up. If that was the case, then the 320 GB HD my dad just got for Father's day for like $169 should have been more like $80. And even if you have a drive with a Terabytye of memory, WAVs still take a long time to download compared to MP3s, even on DSL or Cable. I have DSL running at like 768k and it takes 20 minutes, and sometimes a half hour..for one file. The advantage of MP3 or MP4 is that they are small files, so they take less time to download (five minutes max). Most stores seem to only give you 24 hours to download every track in your cart. |
|
|
| Beat Blog |
| quote: | Originally posted by Storyteller
Let's just say certain people, highly regarded dj's from the top100 playes several tracks of mine thinking they had the WAV. I actually lost that and the source-file aswell. So I did a 320kpbs mp3 > wav decode to pretend I did have a wav in order to get the release. Some of these dj's pretended to hear the difference between mp3 and wav. If they did they wouldn't have played that certain track. I don't believe them anymore and won't take them seriously about this topic anymore. In most cases the difference just isn't audible for any regular human. |
That's all well and good, but if you give someone a track they've never heard before in mp3 format, of course they won't say "hey, this sounds like an mp3", simply because they have no comparison file. Give them the real wav, and they'd say "hey, this sounds heaps better!".
How can you tell a fake Picasso if you've never seen a real one?
In related news, I decided to test myself tonight by listening to a variety of tracks to see if I could tell the difference between 320 mp3 and wav format. I used my pair of Sony V6 headphones, and computer with an el-cheapo stock soundcard. I made sure I couldn't see the filename or bitrate.
9/10, the difference was immediately apparent to me, quite alarmingly so. I expected it to be pretty subtle. The tracks I noticed most were, obviously, ones that I have listened to hundreds of times in wav format, and never in mp3.
The ones that were the hardest to pick were the ones I have only ever listened to in mp3 format, and irregularly.
Perhaps the easiest track to pick was Mannix vs Kaymak - World Gone Mad. It has a pretty strong bassline, and the 320 mp3 was really lacking compared to the wav file in that regard.
Try doing a blind test yourself, you may be surprised by the results as I was. |
|
|
| Zild |
| I've done a bunch of tests. On club systems not studio monitors or headphones. And you really can't tell. Hell in a club you can't even really tell if someone is mixing sloppy. |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| quote: | Originally posted by Beat Blog
That's all well and good, but if you give someone a track they've never heard before in mp3 format, of course they won't say "hey, this sounds like an mp3", simply because they have no comparison file. Give them the real wav, and they'd say "hey, this sounds heaps better!".
|
He proclaimed to recognise the artefacts mp3 compression generates in audio. So this doesn't matter.
You have made a good point there though. As well as further in your post. But you actually gave the answer away as well. how many clubbers listen to the music a dj does regularly AND in wav? Probably less than 1%. In the end an audience couldn't care less if you played 320kbps mp3s or wav. Literally every dj does play mp3s from time to time or all the time. I really don't see the fuss about it. Of couse WAV is better, but if the differences where as obvious as some people say they are mp3 wouldn't be used at all in the first place.
It really doesn't matter if you play 320kbps or wav. No significant amount of people will care about it. It all comes down to you as a dj which one you prefer. Albeit because of the filesize/download times/money involved, either one is okay. |
|
|
| Beat Blog |
| quote: | Originally posted by Storyteller
He proclaimed to recognise the artefacts mp3 compression generates in audio. So this doesn't matter. |
Good point; claiming that you can hear artifacts is a different matter altogether!
In regards to mp3 vs wav in club, up until recently I believed that if you used mp3s, the crowd would notice. I was wrong.
In a club, people will pretty much never notice the difference; it's just too noisy, too much interference. |
|
|
| Mr.Mystery |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
Hell in a club you can't even really tell if someone is mixing sloppy. |
What? |
|
|
| Storyteller |
| Let's just say that depends on the quality ears you have after too many nights of clubbing :stongue: |
|
|
| nefardec |
i'm usually painfully aware of sloppy mixing when i'm at a club
even when i am drunk it bothers me |
|
|
| SPAWNmaster |
| quote: | Originally posted by nefardec
i'm usually painfully aware of sloppy mixing when i'm at a club
even when i am drunk it bothers me |
+1...occupational hazard i suppose |
|
|
|
|
