Black Dog Bluez wrote:QUESTION (export/import quality):
Per saving a copy of say an early stage of a song's edit in case one later wanted to go back to it and reedit from there as opposed to starting all over again..
This, considering you did not want to just keep a duplicate in the project but rather wanted to export it, getting it out of the way.
So, the question is: Is there a format/export option to export as that will result in a zero quality loss? In case one wanted to later import this file back into the project.
In other words, an export format option or options that would result in no quality loss when imported back into the project, where it would still have the same quality as if it was never exported.
Example: If I am editing at 32 bit float, 44 kHz and I export the resultant track as WAVE 32 bit float, 44 kHz, then I later import it back in to the project, would it suffer any loss of quality from this?
BLACK DOG Acoustic guitar and vocals. https://soundcloud.com/blackdogsongs
Black Dog Bluez wrote:UPDATE Oct. 1 2016 "The LANDR Master"
Song: Bananas (LANDR master and My master for comparison) /here--> https://soundcloud.com/blackdogsongs
Recording my own acoustic guitar and vocal performances on one track, in one take, with one of the least expensive recorders, the Tascam DR-05. Then editing with Audacity.
Does using LANDR (an online song mastering website) now mean my amateur editing is best avoided? I don't know. I did conjecture a "click here do-it-all plugin" to do all the deeds ... well LANDR does this ... better than I did it anyway. See both tracks at my site for comparison ... BTW: The LANDR version is my edit (peaks reduced with amplification, envelope, and de-essing) uploaded to LANDRs. I did not send a rough, and this is my first LANDR trial.
Which would be better? Send rough no editing or do some preliminary editing with Audacity first, before letting LANDR perform it's mostly undisclosed editing processes? They do disclose a general description of what they do, but nothing specific! Thus, unrepeatable.
I'll guess, doing some preliminary editing with Audacity would be best. At least, trimming the ends and bringing down excess peaks --- using Amplification, Envelope, and possibly de-essing ... as far as Compressor and other effects, I don't know. If I compress then LANDR compresses, will that be too much compressing?? I've yet to try LANDR straight, letting them do all the editing, so I'll see.
LANDR will no doubt decrease the need for Audacity. Though, it is only free for a resultant 192k MP3 (--- I uploaded WAVE 16 bit/44 kHz).
Here are the spectrum analysis' of the different versions on my linked above webpage:
LANDR's edit of my edit:
You can simply conclude LANDR added High Pass Filter and EQ but that would be a guess, exactly what they did and how they did it is a mystery. BTW: Also some interesting editing by LANDR going on in the 20k area. ALSO: LANDR's version is 192k MP3, so does uploading and viewing the plot spectrum with Audacity of a lossy file distort what the true spectrum is? Being that a lossy file becomes degraded or damaged at some point with such processing.
BLACK DOG "Bananas" Fifty one years in the making. Improvised to endorse the fleeting now. soundcloud.com/blackdogsongs
Black Dog Bluez wrote:Thanks for the info Rob.
Based on your info my primary interest is receiving a free .wav LandR master ('for my upcoming new, anticipated multi-million-selling album "Bananas!"')
Are you stating that to get a .wav LandR master for free one has to upload to LandR a ".Flac" file and choose to have it delivered to one's SoundCloud account? This combination only, or is the only prerequisite --- being that you use your SoundCloud account to recieve the master?
Also, per your mention of sharing ".ogg stream" without the two file per month limit I am not clear on what the .ogg related procedure you are stating is, as I don't recall LandR having such an option, though I did not choose to receive the master directly to my SoundCloud account ..yet.
Also, I have never tried .flac (lossless?) or .ogg, (lossy?) are these considered better than .wav and .mp3?
"A book"? Sure ... or a chart would be cool, especially per the numerous LandR/SoundCloud options you're sharing. --- thanks again.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest