|
|||
rifftrax wrote: DevonB wrote: evolutionator wrote: So what I think is that with 320kbps AND a recent encoder (3.98+) there should be no problems, BUT if the signal touches 0dB the entire song becomes distorted after the encoding -- that's what I learned.
Yup, here's what I've discovered over the years - 128kbps encoding = +0.3dB extra to your song. 320kbps encoding = +0.1dB extra to your song. That's why I brickwall to -0.3dB when I render to MP3. These aren't hard and fast rules, but something in general I've noticed after years of encoding music. Devon It's actually a ton worse than that. Just did a test where (on a pretty heavily limited track with a good amount of pop-style compression) bouncing to 128kbps actually gave me a +1.67db level over the mastered limit at one point (I lowered the gain -2db of the overall file before export to mp3) and regularly was giving +1db overs during any portion that had some limiting applied. This is using the lame encoder. A 320kbps file of the same track gave me a regular amount of just under 1db overs vs. the original limited level. So better but definitely still clipping past the original level by quite a bit. Anyone up to design a program that does intelligent mp3 encoding with active limiting?  Like I said, mine isn't a hard and fast rule, just my own obervations on my own music. However, you did illustrate what I was making reference to that the lower the encoding rate, the hotter the signal becomes. 
Devon ---- Simple music philosophy - Those who can, make music. Those who can't, make excuses. Read my VST reviews at Traxmusic! |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 23 Feb 2003 Member: #6063 Location: Earth, USA | ||
|
|||
carrieres wrote: you simply load your wave file in an editor and decrease the volume by 0.3dB, then you encode in mp3
I'm under the impression that every single volume change also decreases the audio quality? But would this still be the most transparent option? |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 13 Aug 2005 Member: #77992 | ||
|
|||
BertKoor wrote: @Highkoo: Would you be as upset for jpeg, png, avi etc files? Those cannot be edited without re-encoding, but you hear no complaints about that! In the photo / video world noone uses the raw bitmaps, it's all compressed.
it is horrible to watch a movie heavily compressed to squeeze as much as possible data on a single dvd. you can experiment the same thing when looking at low rate video on youtube or tv sat. ----  |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 09 Apr 2002 Member: #2445 Location: Poissy, France | ||
|
|||
Aukikco wrote: carrieres wrote: you simply load your wave file in an editor and decrease the volume by 0.3dB, then you encode in mp3
I'm under the impression that every single volume change also decreases the audio quality? But would this still be the most transparent option? you simply have less volume but the quality is still there. we are talking about few dB. ---- |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 09 Apr 2002 Member: #2445 Location: Poissy, France | ||
|
|||
carrieres wrote: Aukikco wrote: carrieres wrote: you simply load your wave file in an editor and decrease the volume by 0.3dB, then you encode in mp3
I'm under the impression that every single volume change also decreases the audio quality? But would this still be the most transparent option? you simply have less volume but the quality is still there. we are talking about few dB. Keep in mind you're lowering the volume so when you compress the audio it can be raised and not clip the output, so "technically" there is no "volume change" as the end result. But if you were concerned about audio quality, why are you making the audio into an MP3 in the first place would be my question? Devon ---- Simple music philosophy - Those who can, make music. Those who can't, make excuses. Read my VST reviews at Traxmusic! |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 23 Feb 2003 Member: #6063 Location: Earth, USA | ||
|
|||
carrieres wrote: Aukikco wrote: carrieres wrote: you simply load your wave file in an editor and decrease the volume by 0.3dB, then you encode in mp3
I'm under the impression that every single volume change also decreases the audio quality? But would this still be the most transparent option? you simply have less volume but the quality is still there. we are talking about few dB. I'd be happy doing this with a 24 bit file, but Aukikco is talking about an already mastered (I'm guessing 16 bit + dithered) file here. You'd be compromising whatever posh dithering you've paid for by doing this, and a few dB is a much bigger deal at 16 bit than it is at 24. I mean, I'm not the sort of golden-eared person who can hear this kind of thing in all likelihood, but it still seems a bit daft to make any compromise on the audio if your mastering engineer has messed up. If you're asking someone to master your material for digital distribution (i.e. download) and they're sending back material which is appreciably clipped by lossy encoding, you're perfectly within your rights to reject the master as far as I'm concerned. |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 27 Dec 2002 Member: #5154 Location: London | ||
|
|||
Just lower the volume by 0.3dB as suggested (or whatever amount is required to prevent clipping) and be done with it for crying out loud.
Changing volume with a proper audio editor doesn't affect the sound quality. The dithering noise of a 16bit file is irrelevant at this stage, as it is at about -93dBfs already. The MP3 compression will not preserve that at all. If you have the choice between clipping or no dithering, I know what is most perceivable. It's the clipping for sure! ---- We are the KVR collective. Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. 
My MusicCalc is back online!! |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 08 Mar 2005 Member: #60794 Location: Utrecht, Holland | ||
|
|||
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr12/articles/lost-in-trans lation.htm
This is a great article about what encoding does to your audio. I use a little trick of boosting 16kHz and below 115 Hz to compensate and it helped, but you have to check. It CAN sound tinny and your bass can be distorted. But a little nudge seems to work. I never thought about the Joint Stereo option. |
|||
| ^ | Joined: 20 Nov 2003 Member: #10484 |
| KVR Forum Index » Hosts (Sequencers, DAWs, Audio Editors, etc.) | All times are GMT - 8 Hours |
|
Printable version |
Disclaimer: All communications made available as part of this forum and any opinions, advice, statements, views or other information expressed in this forum are solely provided by, and the responsibility of, the person posting such communication and not of kvraudio.com (unless kvraudio.com is specifically identified as the author of the communication).
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
