MP3 or WAV's

[deRaNged 4 Phuk'dup]

^^^I apologize. You took what I was saying the wrong way though. All you took out of what I was saying is "your mixes don't sound like Dre's". I went on to say "my mixes don't sound like Dre's, even Timbalnd's mixes don't sound like Dre's.

The point I continuously make in these type of threads(MP3 vs. Wav vs. Vinyl, Stereo vs. Mono, Hardware vs. Software, $10k input chain vs. USB Mic, ect.)is that what you got is enough to get as good of a sound as average commercial recording.

Folk always come in telling me I don't know what I'm talking about, but their mixes sound just as much like average commercial recording as mines do when I use whatever i got.

Maybe folk just halfway read what I say before they disagree. I never said you want an MP3 over a wav. I said if all you got is an MP3 you don't say "oh well, f**k it, gotta give up on this project". You overlay vocals and process the track, when it's done it will sound as good as any commercial recording if you know how to make a mix sound good.

The only way i'd respect an engineer opposing that is if he had an AMAZING and PHENOMENAL sound to his mix that amazed me. If your shyt don't sound no better that a Lil Wayne song rapped over an mp3 using a USB mic on his tour bus, why are you using anything more or talking down on anything less?

That's not saying Lil Wayne's sound is bad(just like I never said your, my, or Timbo's sound is bad), that's just saying Wayne's got #1 hits that go against all this talk of "better quality" spewed around on this board. He also has "better quality" than alot of folk telling others they need more. And it's not hard(I dare say it's a fairly carless process)to create a "Lil Wayne Quality" album.

---------- Post added at 03:55 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:44 AM ----------

I know that a lot of people on here already understand this, but mp3 is a lossy compression format for audio. That means that you're actually losing portions of your audio data each time you compress it to an mp3.

If you were to compress a beat to mp3, then work with it in a song (say, to record vocals) and then export it again to an mp3, you would have lost quality twice. Ideally, you should only convert audio to an mp3 one time (once everything is done, mixed, and mastered). Every other time that you do it, you're needlessly losing audio quality and if you do it enough, those losses start to stack up.

If you're having a problem with wav file sizes, I would suggest using drop.io. Drop.io is a free service that allows you to upload files up to 100MB which should cover just about any wav you're working with.

Hope this helps.

Dana

Not opposing your statement, actually agree with it in theory 100%. If I just loaded an MP# into a track and exported an mp3 from it with no processing, repeat cycle, this holds true.

But, when you load an mp3 beat or sample(because it's all you got)into an environment to be mixed and processed, you can preserve what could be lost and restore already lost qualities in your sound. Especially once other vocals and even instruments(depending on what's being done)are added. This is the point I've made the entire thread.

---------- Post added at 03:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:55 AM ----------

Plenty of professional recordings have been made using nothing but an "mp3 version' of a beat. A stereo wav gives a small advantage, but if it's not completely tracked out, anything over 160kbps is gonna be good enough.

It'll end up being processed in a 24bit environment using EQs and Dynamics to bring out the best you can, and once vocals are put over the top, it's "good enough". People will always prefer tracked out beats or 24bit stereo wav files to the least, but you gotta work with whatcha got sometimes.

First post I made in the thread.

 

[T Prod.]

Maybe folk just halfway read what I say before they disagree. I never said you want an MP3 over a wav. I said if all you got is an MP3 you don't say "oh well, f**k it, gotta give up on this project". You overlay vocals and process the track, when it's done it will sound as good as any commercial recording if you know how to make a mix sound good.

agree

especially in this era when it's inevitable as an engineer to have a client who won't be able to bring anything other than an mp3. I was just talking about the optimal process.

make the most of what you have, and take the money.

 

[ednom]

i actually like the sound of crush mp3's resampled into a beat

i have mountains of cd, that are multi burn sessioned so that the audio quality is destroyed...from burning crushed mp3's to burning clippin is at 16bit resolution in order to get a messed up sound, then resample it

away from beat makin, i say try to track out as mny times as possible, also provode a reference mix of what the beat sounds like...this way...the engineer can have an easier time droppin ish when it clashes or moving it in the audio space...

with that said, sometime u gotta use what u have and noit all rappers have 1 tb 2.5" hard drives to store tracked out beats for use in recording...sometimes they end up asking 4 a flash from you and there is no way u can load 10 beats ranging from 300-700mb on a 2gb stick

another note, recording on a crsuhed beat is a breeze, simply load it

drop it by some db depending on how loud da damn thing is...can u believe sum ppl crush 4 da sake of crushin and have no idea why there is a limiter in their master bus

record yor verses and do a couple of recordings so you can stack if need be, but 1 take is usually enough

make sure to do backing to make it sound more dynamic...u can simply duplicate and reallign the main reccording

Pan where necessary, do not compress da vocal until any subtractive eq'ing has been done, then listen to the mix on your expensives studio monitors, on you headphones, on cheap desktop speakers and in you car

then when u are happy...let your mother listen to the mixed version and the on that was siply recorded with the beat turned down

and i bet she wont notice coz she aint got that audiophile stuff in here head...at which point u will throw away your sennheiser hd800's and quite making music cause you realise that e=mc2 is not the formula to making a hot mix, let alone a hot track

i hate music engineers sometimes...u let ur emotion colour ur music like the fruity limiter colours your mix

 

[T Prod.]

i actually like the sound of crush mp3's resampled into a beat

i hate music engineers sometimes...u let ur emotion colour ur music like the fruity limiter colours your mix

come oooooon maan.

 

[901_Rice_Street]

we have a very different approach to things. I don't understand, if my mixes doesn't sound like Dr. Dre's 2001, I can't make a true statement about a lossy compression and can't say it shouldn't be used for mixing?

I never said that my only obstacle to a 2001-sounding mix is mp3 or anything. I know I have a lot to learn but I don't know why you had to bring up my mixes when the thread was nothing about my shit.

---------- Post added at 07:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:30 AM ----------



we didn't talking about wack songs or good songs, c800g or 5$ mic, high-quality chain or low-budget. the thread title says "MP3 or WAV".

if I don't have the best equipment, mixing skills in the world that means I should **** my shit up even more with MP3s? come on.

I'm responding to recording vocals over an mp3, which is part of what this thread is about.
What you have is complete silence to fill with sound, so what do you have when you use an mp3 to record your vocals on? No more silence, that's what.

Example of a high quality recording.
[video=youtube;GDJPYg2qLFw&feature=related]video[/video]
Doesn't sound high quality to me on any system.

People have beef with mp3 quality.....but why? Doesn't have a ****ed up sound to me...Cause I aint listening hard like that.


What is mixing? First thing people think is EQ's cutting out shit to make room for other instruments. But want to bounce that shit that has been cut to death to 24 bit and say it's higher quality than a person that knows what he is doing with only an mp3. It's not the file but how it was form....which the song itself plays a major part in how a file type sounds, not the file type. I use all types of diferent file types in one song, it's still a 24 bit picture of what I've done.
If you can't do it big, don't worry about it is all I'm saying. IMO Bout to send shit to get mastered, even though I "think I can do good" me knowing what I know I know what to expect for the money instead of some noninvested shit on my own. Shit better blow away what I get complimented for using fake noise and shit when they got the real deal.

 

[-lil wayne -]

yo close this shit, dont nobody give a ****.

drought 3 better than niggas albums, and i did that shit on 96kbps mp3's on my tourbus from my blackberry. on my and everyone loved it.

 

[T Prod.]

What is mixing? First thing people think is EQ's cutting out shit to make room for other instruments. But want to bounce that shit that has been cut to death to 24 bit and say it's higher quality than a person that knows what he is doing with only an mp3.

there are 3 types of "quality" going on in this thread, and you're completely confusing them.

there is the quality of mixing
the musical quality of a song
and the quality of the audio

i was, and i am talking about the third one, so posts like "I rapped over a 60kbps mp3 and everyone loved it" are out of topic.