The Age Old Question...

omnipresence · Post by **omnipresence** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:28 pm

trak660 wrote:
miniKAT wrote:ok, this is probably a stupid question, but if I have some 192 or 128 and I conver them up to 320, would that make the sound quality better or is that like recording a tape onto a cd?

Thanx
It is pretty much like tape-to-cd.

If the low bit rate copy sounds good to you, "upconverting" can make it more spinnable. The new copy will only sound as good as the original, but at least it won't turn to mud when you pitch it up and down. Anything below 192 is usually too noisy to do this, though.

It doesn't work like that. Even if it might logically seem like you will improve the quality by converting it up you are still RE-encoding the audio. MP3s are lossy. That sound quality is gone forever. Re-encoding an mp3 will degrade the sound quality further no matter what the bitrate before or after.

(The equivalent of tape-to-cd is mp3-to-wav.)

cloutier · Post by **cloutier** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 4:47 pm

you can't compress a wav down to 192, which sounds like balls, and then reconvert it to 320 and have it sound like you went directly from wav to 320.

it'll sound like a 192 that is twice as big of a file and nothing more.

miniKAT · Post by **miniKAT** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:13 pm

I'm just having a hard time with some of u guys saying that if u have a sick track and its 192, u wont play it. That its THAT noticeable.

Its fucking with me cause I have quite a few tracks that are 192, that I like and think are banging, and some of u are saying that if i play them I will be laughed out, shunned from the club or party and basically be relegated to the dregs of society.

cloutier · Post by **cloutier** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:33 pm

miniKAT wrote:I'm just having a hard time with some of u guys saying that if u have a sick track and its 192, u wont play it. That its THAT noticeable.

Its fcking with me cause I have quite a few tracks that are 192, that I like and think are banging, and some of u are saying that if i play them I will be laughed out, shunned from the club or party and basically be relegated to the dregs of society.

lets not go that far...

192's don't have as much bottom end, and they're compressed and flat sounding. sure, on 50% of the sound systems out there, you won't notice sh!t, but break in to that 1/2 of the places that actually don't sound like complete sh!t, and yes, you will notice it.

will someone call you on it? that's a whole different question.

miroslav · Post by **miroslav** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 5:48 pm

miniKAT wrote:I'm just having a hard time with some of u guys saying that if u have a sick track and its 192, u wont play it. That its THAT noticeable.

Its fcking with me cause I have quite a few tracks that are 192, that I like and think are banging, and some of u are saying that if i play them I will be laughed out, shunned from the club or party and basically be relegated to the dregs of society.

If the track is sick enough, then even serious DJs will understand.

But if you really wanted, you could probably get a lot of those tracks as 320s?... Dunno, just guessing.

cloutier · Post by **cloutier** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:02 pm

lets just squelch this whole thing and use an old adage my grandfather used to say on the regular...

"you can't polish a turd."

miniKAT · Post by **miniKAT** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:02 pm

cloutier wrote:
miniKAT wrote:I'm just having a hard time with some of u guys saying that if u have a sick track and its 192, u wont play it. That its THAT noticeable.

Its fcking with me cause I have quite a few tracks that are 192, that I like and think are banging, and some of u are saying that if i play them I will be laughed out, shunned from the club or party and basically be relegated to the dregs of society.
lets not go that far...

192's don't have as much bottom end, and they're compressed and flat sounding. sure, on 50% of the sound systems out there, you won't notice sht, but break in to that 1/2 of the places that actually don't sound like complete sht, and yes, you will notice it.

will someone call you on it? that's a whole different question.

Well. guess I'll take my chances. I've noticed some records have worse quality sound than low ecoded MP3's. Some of Mills records are especially shitty quality. I have a really sick Dj skull track, but the quality of teh recording is sh!t. Quite a few of the 90's records have sub-par quality. I hear it bad quality recordings in Dj sets, but if the DJ is working it, and doing thing and sounding goods, I prob. wouldnt even notice. On the other hand if u suck or even if u dont suck but are just not doing anything but mixing from one record to another in a monotonous fashion, then I think it would def. be noticed. Just my Humble

::BLM:: · Post by **::BLM::** » Thu Aug 20, 2009 6:11 pm

I have played some 128's out before and they sounded fine. It all depends I guess on the final mixdown of the tune.