I've noticed that when I convert a song from .wav to .wma, I get loads of clipping throughout the entire file. I do conversions in SoundForge 6.
Any ideas as to what I'm doing wrong?
WMA format issues
-
- KVRian
- 711 posts since 16 Mar, 2002 from Mostly in planes and hotels. Terra Firma: Seattle, WA
I tend to do this in musicmatch jukebox and have never had any trouble. What bitrate do you convert to?
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
WMA tends to be very lossy indeed, not matter which program is used; however, this type of loss is not normally 'clipping' loss-- I have used WMA to backup CDs before, using Windows Media Player, and have not had that problem.
Greg
Greg
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 509 posts since 15 Jul, 2002 from NYC
In SF I normally use the "128 kbps, 44 khz, stereo 1-pass CBR" algorithm. To be honest, I don't know what most of that means...I just know that the website to which I upload requires all wma files to be 128 kbpsprogfusion74 wrote:I tend to do this in musicmatch jukebox and have never had any trouble. What bitrate do you convert to?
-
Lorenz @ XARC Mastering Lorenz @ XARC Mastering https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7242
- KVRist
- 129 posts since 20 May, 2003 from Germany
The clipping you are getting is normal and is the same with MP3, altough it should be VERY few.
The problem is the limiting of the source-files that will get "destroyed", because encoding is like applying another effect after the limiting is already done (which creates a new wordlength), the peaks will of course not stay where they were supposed to stay. Just try it, apply more processing (for example just a SLIGHT +0.1dB EQ boost somewhere) after already peak-limiting to -0.2dBFS, and you will see the peaks will exceed the -0.2dBFS by far.
Your only protection to not get any clips in an encoded format, is to stay at ~ -2dBFs for the highest peak.
The problem is the limiting of the source-files that will get "destroyed", because encoding is like applying another effect after the limiting is already done (which creates a new wordlength), the peaks will of course not stay where they were supposed to stay. Just try it, apply more processing (for example just a SLIGHT +0.1dB EQ boost somewhere) after already peak-limiting to -0.2dBFS, and you will see the peaks will exceed the -0.2dBFS by far.
Your only protection to not get any clips in an encoded format, is to stay at ~ -2dBFs for the highest peak.
XARC Mastering - The Online Audio Mastering Studio
Give Your Audio The Final Polish For Success With Proven Mastering.
Give Your Audio The Final Polish For Success With Proven Mastering.
-
- KVRAF
- 5634 posts since 18 Jul, 2002
I assume you are not talking about Windows Media v9Lunch Money wrote:WMA tends to be very lossy indeed, not matter which program is used
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 509 posts since 15 Jul, 2002 from NYC
I think you're right, Lorenz. I actually limited to -0.4, but I can assume that would have the same results?Lorenz @ XARC Mastering wrote:The clipping you are getting is normal and is the same with MP3, altough it should be VERY few.
The problem is the limiting of the source-files that will get "destroyed", because encoding is like applying another effect after the limiting is already done (which creates a new wordlength), the peaks will of course not stay where they were supposed to stay. Just try it, apply more processing (for example just a SLIGHT +0.1dB EQ boost somewhere) after already peak-limiting to -0.2dBFS, and you will see the peaks will exceed the -0.2dBFS by far.
Your only protection to not get any clips in an encoded format, is to stay at ~ -2dBFs for the highest peak.
Do you like to receive source files at -2 for mastering projects?
-
Lorenz @ XARC Mastering Lorenz @ XARC Mastering https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=7242
- KVRist
- 129 posts since 20 May, 2003 from Germany
Hi Igor,
The -2dBFS are just an indication for the encoding, so you can avoid clipping there.
The -2dBFS you read everywhere for sending mixes to the mastering studio, is because even some digital meters behave different and is basically a security headroom that takes this into account.
The -2dBFS are just an indication for the encoding, so you can avoid clipping there.
The -2dBFS you read everywhere for sending mixes to the mastering studio, is because even some digital meters behave different and is basically a security headroom that takes this into account.
XARC Mastering - The Online Audio Mastering Studio
Give Your Audio The Final Polish For Success With Proven Mastering.
Give Your Audio The Final Polish For Success With Proven Mastering.
-
- KVRAF
- 12977 posts since 29 Sep, 2003 from Ottawa, Canada
Yeah, I use WMP for WMA conversions. It's probably better than MP3 (to be honest, I don't really know), but at the max. rate of 192kps, it's no pristine backup solution.george wrote:I assume you are not talking about Windows Media v9Lunch Money wrote:WMA tends to be very lossy indeed, not matter which program is used
Greg
-
- KVRAF
- 5634 posts since 18 Jul, 2002
192? I bet you haven't used VBR instead. Shame WMP9 won't do double pass encoding. For backups I'd go WMA lossless instead, since it will play in any WINXP SP2 machine.Lunch Money wrote:Yeah, I use WMP for WMA conversions. It's probably better than MP3 (to be honest, I don't really know), but at the max. rate of 192kps, it's no pristine backup solution.