KVR Audio

Katelyn · Post by **Katelyn** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 10:07 am

I know it sucks because of how it compresses the data, but I never realized how much until I just put a quick demo of a track of mine into mp3 format over .wav so I wouldn't take 20 minutes to upload it on my terrible internet.

I'd rather just wait 20 minutes if it means people hear the track how it's meant to sound lol

I mean I guess you can't really make it out on most headsets on the go, but really? Do people just not care or don't notice?

Aloysius · Post by **Aloysius** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 10:44 am

Well, you could try out some dedicated software:

http://www.sonnoxplugins.com/pub/plugin ... -codec.htm

It's expensive of course but if you really, really want to get the best possible results, I don't know of anything better.

Update: There's a sonnox group buy on at DC:

http://www.dontcrack.com/news/2015/03/s ... dontcrack/

Katelyn · Post by **Katelyn** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 11:39 am

I plan to just use .wav or flac

But rather, I was just wondering why mp3 format is so popular when it's so bad. Most places that sell music that you download (itunes ect) typically gives you mp3 format. It must partly be that the file size is so small and that most people don't know better.

Aloysius · Post by **Aloysius** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 11:46 am

Well I don't know what age you are but some of us were around long before the Internet was even invented. MP3 was and is, small and portable. It's become the accepted standard. Flac would be better now but can you imagine trying to get the entire world to change, just so they could hear your music in a better quality format? Kids these days even believe that MP3 sounds better than ''wav'' anyway. Etc...

murnau · Post by **murnau** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 11:59 am

It's clear a lossy format but MP3 is great if you know how to deal with it.

Katelyn · Post by **Katelyn** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 12:31 pm

Aloysius wrote:Well I don't know what age you are but some of us were around long before the Internet was even invented. MP3 was and is, small and portable. It's become the accepted standard. Flac would be better now but can you imagine trying to get the entire world to change, just so they could hear your music in a better quality format? Kids these days even believe that MP3 sounds better than ''wav'' anyway. Etc...

I remember lugging around a CD player with a single CD in it as a young teen a decade ago when I wanted to listen to something if that gives you an idea. I can see the convenience but at a certain point for some music....

murnau wrote:It's clear a lossy format but MP3 is great if you know how to deal with it.

So what would someone have to keep in mind if they wanted to account for mp3 formats?

murnau · Post by **murnau** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:04 pm

I use the excellent free LAME encoder which is really the best for high bitrates and VBR. Most of the time 256 or 320 kbit/S in HQ. The results are good enough really.

Ultrasonic · Post by **Ultrasonic** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:04 pm

Katelyn wrote:I plan to just use .wav or flac

But rather, I was just wondering why mp3 format is so popular when it's so bad. Most places that sell music that you download (itunes ect) typically gives you mp3 format. It must partly be that the file size is so small and that most people don't know better.

I think you'll find that a lot of people dont want to deal with wav files. Especially if they need to download it. I remember seeing some moaning for anything being linked outside the forum.. 2 clicks seemed to be sooo much hassle compared to one lol. Imagine having to wait for it to download, and then of course, a small security risk.

I kinda agree in a way. It really easy so easy to just one click the site player.

Im thinking you have other things going on though... An MP3 file isnt always going to be as poor sounding as what you might think. As Aloysius said dedicated software helps a lot, but honestly, ive tossed MP3 files in a mix for musicians an engineers before, and no one knew any different.

I know it sucks because of how it compresses the data, but I never realized how much until I just put a quick demo of a track of mine into mp3 format over .wav so I wouldn't take 20 minutes to upload it on my terrible internet.

Again the difference isnt going to be mind blowing. Especially in a lower end monitoring/conversion/acoustics situation. Make sure when you are exporting, that you are exporting at 320mbps or the highest option your DAW allows for. If you are down around 128 or lower, then yeah youre getting into the let down range.

ere2learn · Post by **ere2learn** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:09 pm

what bitrate are we talking about because there's no difference between a 320 mp3 or wav,to 99% of people that listen to it ,if your that 1% you just joined the golden ear club,

get a "a b x tester" and test some music you never heard before in 320 vs wav

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:13 pm

ere2learn wrote:what bitrate are we talking about because there's no difference between a 320 mp3 or wav,to 99% of people that listen to it ,if your that 1% you just joined the golden ear club,

I recently listened to the same track in wav and MP3 320 kb/s on really good studio monitors, and couldn't tell the difference, while someone else could (he claimed). I guess the difference is really that small that you got to have very good ears, got to know your speakers well, got to have heard the track a couple of times etc. So yep, i'd think the 99 to 1 % ratio is about right.

fedexnman · Post by **fedexnman** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:20 pm

murnau wrote:I use the excellent free LAME encoder which is really the best for high bitrates and VBR. Most of the time 256 or 320 kbit/S in HQ. The results are good enough really.

iTunes uses aac instead of mp3 , I think at 256 . Google Play and Amazon use mp3 at 320 now I believe or 256 ? .. ..... When mp3 or aac was sold or shared years ago , remember 99¢ and DRM ,I think they were done at 128 and man that was horribly noticeable . I think iTunes , Amazon ,Google Play have better quality mp3 / aac files now , I'm fine with it . What I do have a problem with is the loudness wars and a mp3 that is so compressed from mastering that all the bass is sucked out of it and its a treble fest . I've noticed this on CDs as well , which I won't buy anymore I'm done with that format.

murnau · Post by **murnau** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:33 pm

Regarding "Loudness War" the problem is rather the original source then the MP3 imo.

fedexnman · Post by **fedexnman** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 1:47 pm

murnau wrote:Regarding "Loudness War" the problem is rather the original source then the MP3 imo.

Exactly , I wonder how much material is ruined even before it goes to the mastering engineers these days ?

chk071 · Post by **chk071** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 2:09 pm

fedexnman wrote:When mp3 or aac was sold or shared years ago , remember 99¢ and DRM ,I think they were done at 128 and man that was horribly noticeable .

I guess it was also done because people's bandwidth wasn't really high in average back then. Nowadays it's no problem to download 12 tracks at 20 MB each. But yeah, i remember that 128 kb/s was even tagged as CD quality.

Compyfox · Post by **Compyfox** » Sat Mar 21, 2015 2:19 pm

Katelyn wrote:I know it sucks because of how it compresses the data, but I never realized how much until I just put a quick demo of a track of mine into mp3 format over .wav so I wouldn't take 20 minutes to upload it on my terrible internet.

A little bit of background info would be nice.

MP3 has it's limits, especially with high loudness content already starting at -8dB RMS (realtime) avg, and getting worse the higher you push it. If you also don't use proper brickwall limiting at this stage, the CODEC can't take it anymore and things start to sound crap.

So some info would be nice. Like:
- Sampling Rate and Bitrate
- Loudness
- music genre
- settings of your CODEC and what CODEC do you use?

Katelyn wrote:I'd rather just wait 20 minutes if it means people hear the track how it's meant to sound lol

Next question - where do you want to upload it?

If it's SoundCloud or YouTube then chances are that you do not(!) need to encode your audio stream, as both services can do that for you (from the RAW files). If you upload a MP3, chances are that the provider then "re-encodes" and things turn for the worse.

If it's just a webpage, then a track at suitable loudness, VBR 320kbit (or even 224kbit) is already outstanding. And 192kbit VBR is suitable enough for "slow ISP users".

I am talking of the old LAME codec at v3.9x

Katelyn wrote:I plan to just use .wav or flac

Keep in mind, FLAC is limited to 24bit. The alternative is WAVPACK, but that's not as widespread and barely any software/hardware player can play that back.

Katelyn wrote:I mean I guess you can't really make it out on most headsets on the go, but really? Do people just not care or don't notice?

Katelyn wrote:But rather, I was just wondering why mp3 format is so popular when it's so bad. Most places that sell music that you download (itunes ect) typically gives you mp3 format. It must partly be that the file size is so small and that most people don't know better.

Well, MP3 dates way back into the late 90ies as "standard format", and it got major popular due to reverse engineering (I still remember Fraunhofer being not happy about it, but they adapted and improved their CODEC - yes, I also remember "CD quality = 128kbit", I also remember MP3pro for Podcasts, which was actually great!), even before OGG came along (that never really picked up). Though through the years, the CODEC established itself as widespread and "most used format" (due to heavy advertising, bundling it with pretty much every hardware, etc). Actually, it's successor AAC is on the rise (no thanks to iTunes - but with the formerly infamous DRM system), which offers a great(er) sound at similar or even lower bitrate values. Though it will still take a while to catch on - especially HD-AA, not to mention due to the lack of "affordable tools" (SONNOX CODEC Toolbox is affordable though).

MP3 and AAC HE are still lossy CODECs however. So you need to know their limits. And one of it is running your signal too hot prior to encoding.

So please... before this turns into a hate fest - fill us in what you want to do, and how "hot" your content is. Maybe then we can help you.

mp3 sucks