128 or 320?
Forum rules
By using this "Production" sub-forum, you acknowledge that you have read, understood and agreed with our terms of use for this site. Click HERE to read them. If you do not agree to our terms of use, you must exit this site immediately. We do not accept any responsibility for the content, submissions, information or links contained herein. Users posting content here, do so completely at their own risk.
Quick Link to Feedback Forum
By using this "Production" sub-forum, you acknowledge that you have read, understood and agreed with our terms of use for this site. Click HERE to read them. If you do not agree to our terms of use, you must exit this site immediately. We do not accept any responsibility for the content, submissions, information or links contained herein. Users posting content here, do so completely at their own risk.
Quick Link to Feedback Forum
128 or 320?
Ok so its the bitrate yeah? How is a tune produced in one or the other?
Re: 128 or 320?
Ruskie wrote:Ok so its the bitrate yeah? How is a tune produced in one or the other?
Yeah, dubstep is all about 320 kbps. Most techno is done in 192, whereas jungle is known for that special 256 sound. My guess is that the next big thing will be some kind of freaky 512 music with short beakdowns into 64.
-
two oh one
- Posts: 2786
- Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:30 am
- Location: Croydon ---> Los Angeles
- Contact:
Re: 128 or 320?
inspector wrote:Ruskie wrote:Ok so its the bitrate yeah? How is a tune produced in one or the other?
Yeah, dubstep is all about 320 kbps. Most techno is done in 192, whereas jungle is known for that special 256 sound. My guess is that the next big thing will be some kind of freaky 512 music with short beakdowns into 64.
If you want to get nerdy about mp3 encoding, you are just as good off - if not better, considering the smaller file size - using a very high VBR rate.
-V0 or -V1 in lame is very very good, and indistinguishable from 320 CBR files except in very rare cases.
CBR is old-school.
Recommended Lame settings
It'd be cool to start using FLAC or wavpack more generally.
-V0 or -V1 in lame is very very good, and indistinguishable from 320 CBR files except in very rare cases.
CBR is old-school.
Recommended Lame settings
It'd be cool to start using FLAC or wavpack more generally.
-
two oh one
- Posts: 2786
- Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:30 am
- Location: Croydon ---> Los Angeles
- Contact:
-
narcossist
- Posts: 720
- Joined: Sun May 07, 2006 2:21 pm
be nice ya cnuts
Dirtycash - that survey is bollocks mate
128's sound shit, they've a nasty digital swoosh that floats about like a badly mixed flanger and the sub or bass nearly always sounds muffled. No ones ever gonna sign a tune based on hearing a 128 cos you genuinely can't tell how good the production on it is.
people put 128's up cos its pretty safe that no one will try and play it out, they put 320kps up if they want it playing, if you're cutting a dub or getting a tune pressed you want a wav or flac file cos they're higher resolution again.
a 128 will sound ropey cos the logarithims [been up all night and can't spell] don't map the sound as accurately, in the same way that a 2megapixel image looks wack when its bigger than a postage stamp whereas a 16megapixel image can look good when projected onto the side of a building.
hope that explained it a bit....
Dirtycash - that survey is bollocks mate
people put 128's up cos its pretty safe that no one will try and play it out, they put 320kps up if they want it playing, if you're cutting a dub or getting a tune pressed you want a wav or flac file cos they're higher resolution again.
a 128 will sound ropey cos the logarithims [been up all night and can't spell] don't map the sound as accurately, in the same way that a 2megapixel image looks wack when its bigger than a postage stamp whereas a 16megapixel image can look good when projected onto the side of a building.
hope that explained it a bit....
exactly!narcossist wrote:be nice ya cnuts![]()
Dirtycash - that survey is bollocks mate128's sound shit, they've a nasty digital swoosh that floats about like a badly mixed flanger and the sub or bass nearly always sounds muffled. No ones ever gonna sign a tune based on hearing a 128 cos you genuinely can't tell how good the production on it is.
people put 128's up cos its pretty safe that no one will try and play it out, they put 320kps up if they want it playing, if you're cutting a dub or getting a tune pressed you want a wav or flac file cos they're higher resolution again.
a 128 will sound ropey cos the logarithims [been up all night and can't spell] don't map the sound as accurately, in the same way that a 2megapixel image looks wack when its bigger than a postage stamp whereas a 16megapixel image can look good when projected onto the side of a building.
hope that explained it a bit....
people generally use 128 for ipods coz you can't really tell the difference on headphones.
All it needed an answer without sarcasm. Cheers.narcossist wrote:be nice ya cnuts![]()
Dirtycash - that survey is bollocks mate128's sound shit, they've a nasty digital swoosh that floats about like a badly mixed flanger and the sub or bass nearly always sounds muffled. No ones ever gonna sign a tune based on hearing a 128 cos you genuinely can't tell how good the production on it is.
people put 128's up cos its pretty safe that no one will try and play it out, they put 320kps up if they want it playing, if you're cutting a dub or getting a tune pressed you want a wav or flac file cos they're higher resolution again.
a 128 will sound ropey cos the logarithims [been up all night and can't spell] don't map the sound as accurately, in the same way that a 2megapixel image looks wack when its bigger than a postage stamp whereas a 16megapixel image can look good when projected onto the side of a building.
hope that explained it a bit....
-
paul updat
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 2:52 pm
- Location: Taking a shit on your face.
Innit. It seems a straight forward way of finding out stuff you want to know. You'd think anyway...Ruskie wrote:All it needed an answer without sarcasm. Cheers.narcossist wrote:be nice ya cnuts![]()
Dirtycash - that survey is bollocks mate128's sound shit, they've a nasty digital swoosh that floats about like a badly mixed flanger and the sub or bass nearly always sounds muffled. No ones ever gonna sign a tune based on hearing a 128 cos you genuinely can't tell how good the production on it is.
people put 128's up cos its pretty safe that no one will try and play it out, they put 320kps up if they want it playing, if you're cutting a dub or getting a tune pressed you want a wav or flac file cos they're higher resolution again.
a 128 will sound ropey cos the logarithims [been up all night and can't spell] don't map the sound as accurately, in the same way that a 2megapixel image looks wack when its bigger than a postage stamp whereas a 16megapixel image can look good when projected onto the side of a building.
hope that explained it a bit....
i render my tunes as 128's 2 go onto my iPod, just cause the files a bit smallerDIRTY wrote:exactly!narcossist wrote:be nice ya cnuts![]()
Dirtycash - that survey is bollocks mate128's sound shit, they've a nasty digital swoosh that floats about like a badly mixed flanger and the sub or bass nearly always sounds muffled. No ones ever gonna sign a tune based on hearing a 128 cos you genuinely can't tell how good the production on it is.
people put 128's up cos its pretty safe that no one will try and play it out, they put 320kps up if they want it playing, if you're cutting a dub or getting a tune pressed you want a wav or flac file cos they're higher resolution again.
a 128 will sound ropey cos the logarithims [been up all night and can't spell] don't map the sound as accurately, in the same way that a 2megapixel image looks wack when its bigger than a postage stamp whereas a 16megapixel image can look good when projected onto the side of a building.
hope that explained it a bit....
people generally use 128 for ipods coz you can't really tell the difference on headphones.
If you want lower bitrate but high quality, encode as 160-190 VBR, which brings you pretty close to 320 CBR but alot smaller files.
A tip is to also encode mp3's from 32-bit float exports also, since mp3 is a float format. Alot of peeps mistakenly think mp3 is a 16-bit format, like CD.
If you first render to 24 or 16 bit WAVs, you're doing unnecessary dithering and shitting all over your mix for no reason and questionable pleasure.
For dynamic bass, this matters. We care about bass.
A tip is to also encode mp3's from 32-bit float exports also, since mp3 is a float format. Alot of peeps mistakenly think mp3 is a 16-bit format, like CD.
If you first render to 24 or 16 bit WAVs, you're doing unnecessary dithering and shitting all over your mix for no reason and questionable pleasure.
For dynamic bass, this matters. We care about bass.
you CAN go to mp3 from a 24 bit mix but there's not a huge point to-- once you got to MP3 you're losing more than what you gain from using 24 bit.
if you're going down to 16 bit, you've gotta dither... if you don't, you're losing the clarity of that bass. w/o the dither you get that nasty, digital sheen.
if you're going down to 16 bit, you've gotta dither... if you don't, you're losing the clarity of that bass. w/o the dither you get that nasty, digital sheen.
twitter.com/sharmabeats
twitter.com/SubSwara
subswara.com
myspace.com/davesharma
Low Motion Records, Soul Motive, TKG, Daly City, Mercury UK
twitter.com/SubSwara
subswara.com
myspace.com/davesharma
Low Motion Records, Soul Motive, TKG, Daly City, Mercury UK
Possibly, but that depends on your target mp3 quality. Dithering (or *ick* just truncating) down to 16-bit can be audible in high quality VBR or 320k CBR files. so there's really no point in going that route when there's nothing to gain from it.TeReKeTe wrote:you CAN go to mp3 from a 24 bit mix but there's not a huge point to-- once you got to MP3 you're losing more than what you gain from using 24 bit.
It's also not a good idea to use 16 bit audio as archive format for your finished tracks. Always save 32-bit floats or 24-bit for mastering (Note: there's no need to dither when going from float to 24-bit). From these you can then master 16-bit CD's, mp3s (without going to 16 bit first) and plates.
This leaves headroom for processing during mastering, and leaves media-specific details like dithering (for CD) to the mastering process.
For archiving, using a lossless format like wavpack, monkey's audio or flac is a good idea if you want to save space.
For more useful info mp3 settings, check out the LAME wiki.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


