Become a part of the TranceAddict community!Frequently Asked Questions - Please read this if you haven'tSearch the forums
TranceAddict Forums > DJing / Production / Promotion > Production Studio > What you're actually losing when you compress to MP3...
Pages (2): [1] 2 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread    Post A Reply
DJ RANN
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: May 2001
Location: Hollywood....
What you're actually losing when you compress to MP3...

Really interesting study about what is actually lost when you comrpess to MP3 - the track and the vid are made entirely from compression loss for Tom's Diner (mp3 and Mp4 respectively).

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/237...ompress-to-mp3/

Old Post Feb-21-2015 20:52 
Click Here to See the Profile for DJ RANN Click here to Send DJ RANN a Private Message Add DJ RANN to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Vector A
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: Apr 2011
Location: U.S.

That is indeed interesting, and on the project's info page he states he used 320 kbps MP3s. So even at the highest quality level, there is significant loss.

Old Post Feb-21-2015 22:42  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for Vector A Click here to Send Vector A a Private Message Add Vector A to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
evo8
Virtual Wannabe



Registered: Aug 2004
Location:

doesnt matter only if you can distinguish between 320 and CD quality in a blind test


___________________
soundcloud
youtube

Old Post Feb-21-2015 22:46  Ireland
Click Here to See the Profile for evo8 Click here to Send evo8 a Private Message Visit evo8's homepage! Add evo8 to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Robotrance
Sup



Registered: Jun 2003
Location:

There's a big difference between 320kbps MP3 and WAV to me however it's not that easily found by A/B comparing listening test. The test is really for how long I can listen to loud music without getting tired. With wav I can listen 12 times as long as with 320kbps MP3. With 128kbps I can't almos listen to one song. And all of this is further problematic with over compresses music from mastering. Listening to vinyl has a lot of noise and crackles but it's not tiring. From my perspective I can t wait to 24bit 96khz is the snandard for streaming and with the new American radio/TV compression guidelines that allows for much better dynamics without loosing loudness (average rms normalization benefit uncompressed music and punish over compressed music) - we may have a good time a head. This analog to digital transition (mp3, YouTube, streaming, not cd though) have been hell but there's light in the end of the tunnel. Kids of tomorrow may not have to experience all this shit sound. Except for shitty Asia stereos though.

Last edited by Robotrance on Feb-22-2015 at 11:29

Old Post Feb-21-2015 23:52 
Click Here to See the Profile for Robotrance Click here to Send Robotrance a Private Message Add Robotrance to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Innocence Lost
WhO Cares AkA Sir Pounce



Registered: Jan 2014
Location: Aventura, FL

MP3's = Good transitions.


Old Post Feb-22-2015 00:00  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for Innocence Lost Click here to Send Innocence Lost a Private Message Add Innocence Lost to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
DJ RANN
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: May 2001
Location: Hollywood....

quote:
Originally posted by evo8
doesnt matter only if you can distinguish between 320 and CD quality in a blind test


True, and I can on a nice system, but honestly only as a comparitive (i.e. I have a track in both mediums to A/B against). I know engineers though that can nail mp3 bit rates though. Impressive shit.

quote:
Originally posted by Palm
There's a big difference between 320kbps MP3 and WAV to me however it's not that easily found by A/B comparing listening test. The test is really for how long I can listen to loud music without getting tired. With wav I can listen 12 times as long as with 320kbps MP3. With 128kbps I can't almos listen to one song. And all of this is further problematic with over compresses music from mastering. Listening to vinyl has a lot of noise and crackles but it's not tiring. From my perspective I can t wait to 24bit 96khz is the snandard for streaming and with the new American radio/TV compression guidelines that allows for much better dynamics without loosing loudness (average rms normalization benefit uncompressed music and punish over compressed music) - we may have a good time a head. This analog to digital transition (mp3, YouTube, streaming, not cd though) have been heel but there's light in the end of the tunnel. Kids of tomorrow may not have to experience all this shit sound. Except for shitty Asia stereos though.


I completely agree with this. I was going to say it in the recent soundcloud thread but I cannot fucking wait for soundcloud to go under; Shitty lossy compression, buggy interface, even glitchier waveform players and tons of spam and circle jerk posts. Spotify is marginally better at 320k for their "high quality" (lol) option but most somehow suffer through 160 or god forbid 96 on mobile.

We've gone through a period of having decent quality reproduction (vinyl, CD, SACD etc) to really bad (in the name of availability) and hopefully with infrastructure improving (higher internet bandwidth, more server space etc) we'll get a period of high quality again, like wav or flac streaming. Can't wait.

Old Post Feb-22-2015 01:21 
Click Here to See the Profile for DJ RANN Click here to Send DJ RANN a Private Message Add DJ RANN to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Kthought
Senior tranceaddict



Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Joshua Tree

just making the jump from mp3 to lossless right now will provide us 20 years of fresh high quality relief from this overindulged quagmire we suffer through presently. Somebody said 24Bit / 96Khz Stanard? holy shitballs. sometimes i bounce short abstract effectey loops like at -32db~-24db in the internal mixer at 24/96 and listen very closely. there's so much space and so much available density, the bottleneck of efficiency becomes my ears and brain.

Old Post Feb-22-2015 03:47  United States
Click Here to See the Profile for Kthought Click here to Send Kthought a Private Message Add Kthought to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Robotrance
Sup



Registered: Jun 2003
Location:

I recently found out that spotify have implemented this rms normalization and the fact that I've released my music uncompressed and with 10dB free headroom makes my music sound much more dynamic and powerfull than over compressed music does due to my music being gained and others being reduced. And I still get to keep the dynamic range and tiny peaks. I'm so happy with this, it's totally not the case in iTunes (so far) - also most spotify user probably have this option disabled to allow compressed music to sound as loud as possible on their iPhones, while my music is almost not hearable. It's a two edged sword to release uncompressed music - for audiophiles its great but for consumers it's probably waste unless rms normalization and HD sound will be default turned on when installing. When spotify goes cd quality 1400kbps I'll be happy though. My music still have shitty mixing, that's my akkiles heel but I can work on that. The platforms is out of my control and I can only try to make as pleasant music as possible and adapt to the platforms options.

Old Post Feb-22-2015 11:29 
Click Here to See the Profile for Robotrance Click here to Send Robotrance a Private Message Add Robotrance to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
tehlord
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: Jan 2009
Location: Windsor

quote:
Originally posted by DJ RANN
True, and I can on a nice system, but honestly only as a comparitive (i.e. I have a track in both mediums to A/B against). I know engineers though that can nail mp3 bit rates though. Impressive shit.



I completely agree with this. I was going to say it in the recent soundcloud thread but I cannot fucking wait for soundcloud to go under; Shitty lossy compression, buggy interface, even glitchier waveform players and tons of spam and circle jerk posts. Spotify is marginally better at 320k for their "high quality" (lol) option but most somehow suffer through 160 or god forbid 96 on mobile.

We've gone through a period of having decent quality reproduction (vinyl, CD, SACD etc) to really bad (in the name of availability) and hopefully with infrastructure improving (higher internet bandwidth, more server space etc) we'll get a period of high quality again, like wav or flac streaming. Can't wait.


I thought Spotify was Ogg? It used to be I'm sure.


___________________
Soundcloud

Old Post Feb-22-2015 12:07  United Kingdom
Click Here to See the Profile for tehlord Click here to Send tehlord a Private Message Add tehlord to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Robotrance
Sup



Registered: Jun 2003
Location:

quote:
Originally posted by tehlord
I thought Spotify was Ogg? It used to be I'm sure.

whats the difference?
its 320kbps max is ogg better than mp3 somehow? never thought about it. from what i can read orbis support surround too?

ive compared WiMP/TIDAL and Spotify both @320kbps and wimp adds some weird distortion that ive never heard before. they do support CD quality though but if the decoder is buggy i dont know anymore.


edit:
quote:

Spotify uses 3 quality ratings for streaming, all in the Ogg Vorbis format.

~96 kbps
Normal quality on mobile.

~160 kbps
Desktop and web player standard quality.
High quality on mobile.

~320 kbps (only available to Premium subscribers)
Desktop high quality.
Extreme quality on mobile.



quote:

WiMP/TIDAL SOUND FORMATS

HiFi
For full lossless experience we use FLAC on everything apart from on iOS, where we use ALAC (Apple Lossless). It is all in 44.1 kHz / 16 bit, which is exactly same files as on CDs.

High
To get as close as possible to CD quality but with smaller files, we use AAC 320 kbps.

Standard
To achieve best possible sound but a very efficient file size we use AAC+ 96. AAC+ is the same as HE AAC and we use version 1 with spectral band replication.

DELIVERY FORMAT PER PLATFORM
Android, AAC+ 96, AAC 320, FLAC *
iOS, AAC+ 96, AAC 320, ALAC
Desktop, AAC+ 96, AAC 320, FLAC
Sonos, AAC 320, FLAC
Bluesound, AAC 320, FLAC
Squeezebox, MP3 256, FLAC
Download, MP3 256
Canal Digital, AAC 320
N, AAC 320

* FLAC requires Android 3.1 or higher

Last edited by Robotrance on Feb-22-2015 at 13:07

Old Post Feb-22-2015 12:57 
Click Here to See the Profile for Robotrance Click here to Send Robotrance a Private Message Add Robotrance to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
tehlord
Supreme tranceaddict



Registered: Jan 2009
Location: Windsor

There was an Ogg vs mp3 test I listened to a couple of years ago and Ogg sounded way smoother to me. I don't know how it all works but the claim was the compression algorithms are just better.


___________________
Soundcloud

Old Post Feb-22-2015 15:13  United Kingdom
Click Here to See the Profile for tehlord Click here to Send tehlord a Private Message Add tehlord to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message
Mr.Mystery
What?



Registered: Dec 2001
Location: Vantaa

The thing about ogg is that it produces smaller files compared to MP3, and that it's open source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorbis#Quality

I supported ogg very strongly back in the day, but it never really caught on due to MP3 being so dominant. I'm not sure how relevant it is now that we've got lossless compression and faster internet speeds.

Old Post Feb-22-2015 16:11  Finland
Click Here to See the Profile for Mr.Mystery Click here to Send Mr.Mystery a Private Message Add Mr.Mystery to your buddy list Report this Post Reply w/Quote Edit/Delete Message

TranceAddict Forums > DJing / Production / Promotion > Production Studio > What you're actually losing when you compress to MP3...
Post New Thread    Post A Reply

Pages (2): [1] 2 »  
Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Subscribe to this Thread

Forum Jump:

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:01.

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
 
Search this Thread:

 
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict

Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2015

Privacy Statement / DMCA
Geo Visitors Map

Icon