When we export a file in MP3 format, we know that this is a compression format and there is a lot of loss. The WAVE format is a lossless format.
Could you guide me which configurations we can perform so that when the file is exported in MP3 format, so many losses do not occur, that is, that it is very close to the quality of a WAVE format?
Could you recommend a professional equipment that reads MP3 songs from a pen drive or even has an internal storage so I can connect it to my mixer?
That’s why I always perform live playing the saxophone and use playbacks as a base.
Could you guide me which configurations we can perform so that when the file is exported in MP3 format, so many losses do not occur, that is, that it is very close to the quality of a WAVE format?
MP3 can often sound identical to the original, or you may have to listen very carefully to hear the difference. It depends on the bitrate, the nature of the audio, and your ability to hear compression artifacts. MP3 is “smart” and its main trick is to throw-away “details” that are masked (drowned-out) by more dominate sounds.
However, if you open an MP3 in Audacity (or any “normal” audio editor) it gets decompressed. If you re-export as MP3 it goes through another generation of lossy compression and some “damage” does accumulate.
The bitrate is a rough indication of quality. Higher bitrate = less compression = larger files = better quality. Just for reference - CD audio has a bitrate of 1411kpps and FLAC (lossless compression) can compress to about half of the original bitrate.
The “best” overall setting is 30kbps constant bitrate. The “best” variable bitrate setting is V0. With variable bitrate, you choose the quality setting and the encoder chooses the moment-to-moment bitrate… Easy to compress sounds (including silence) can be compressed to a lower bitrate (smaller files). If you have a stereo file “Joint Stereo” is the best. The LAME encoder also has an average bitrate setting which is also variable bitrate that adjusts moment-to-moment to make the best use of the “bits”. But the result is a predictable overall-average bitrate (for predictable file size).
But, it’s ALWASY lossy and every sample is altered so we can’t really say 320kbps is “better” than 240kpbs unless it actually sounds better.
Could you recommend a professional equipment that reads MP3 songs from a pen drive or even has an internal storage so I can connect it to my mixer?
That’s why I always perform live playing the saxophone and use playbacks as a base.
The best thing would be a portable audio player (like an iPod) or your smart phone plugged-into your mixer’s analog input.
Most mixers with USB ports can’t read/write a USB drive. These USB mixers are “USB devices” designed to be plugged into a computer which is the “USB host”.
As above, MP3 gets its small sizes by re-arranging musical tones—and leaving some of them out. Once you make an MP3, the damage is permanent. The best you can do is select higher ‘quality’ numbers for less damage, and as you do, the files get bigger.
You can convert the work to WAV later, but that gives you a perfect quality WAV file with MP3 distorted music in it. You can’t reverse the compression effect.
All my regular recorders can work directly in WAV to avoid this trap. This is my Olympus which will hide in a shirt pocket.
It will accept a special microphone to record both sides of a phone call.
For higher quality work, I can use a Zoom H1n.
I do have a very small sound recorder (size of a USB stick) and it will save in WAV, but at lesser quality, so I don’t use it any more.
Could you recommend a professional equipment that reads MP3 songs from a pen drive or even has an internal storage so I can connect it to my mixer?
That’s why I always perform live playing the saxophone and use playbacks as a base.
As Steve wrote, you just need a mp3 player or mobile phone connected to another channel on your main mixer.
Another option, there are small mixers available that have a built-in mp3 player (via USB pen drive).
They also have mic inputs that you can use for you sax.
Here is one example:
However, your best would probably be to use a laptop to play the mp3 backing tracks.
Apps available on a computer will normally give you more options as to cueing, selections, bit rates , etc.
When I was digitizing my LP collection I did some careful listening tests on my hi-fi rig - QUAD 33/303 amp and QUAD ESL-57 electrostatic speakers - and with my Sennheiser studio headphones.
My ears are ageing (more than somewhat)
I could clearly hear MP3 degradation at 128 kbps
I could hear slight degradation at 192 kbps
I couldn’t hear degradation at 256 kbps
So 256 is what I settled on for my exports (I also exported as WAV for archive purposes). My son, who is a purist, insisted on using 320 kbps and soon more than filled fis iPod as the files are larger!
What I do find with MP3 and AAC even at 256 kbps versus playing the same track on my Rega Planet CD player on the hi-fi is that the CD seems to have a slightly better grip on the stereo sound stage than the MP3/AAC compressed versions.
I too, can’t hear a difference between 256K and 320K MP3’s, however, I always export as 320K if I need MP3.
As long as it’s CBR, even my car radio will play them.
The stereo imaging problems that you are noticing, I wonder if that has anything to do with phase “problems”
that mp3 filtering introduces?
What I also hear, is at times and depending on the music content, on some high frequency peaks, the MP3’s are more “shrilly”
and sound artificial.
Must add that at no point was there any clipping involved (always leave at least 1dB of headroom).
quite possible, but it’s not a problem now. Originally I connected my iPod to the hi-fi with a good iPod dock.
But later I bought an online jukebox with a 1TB drive (Cocktail Audio X30) - so that now carries my library in 16-bit PCM WAV format for playing on the hi-fi.
You could always do a “quick and dirty”, self check using tones and checking what the loss is as frequency increases.
(Your Sennheiser cans will have a pretty flat response to at least 20KHz).
Once you get a rough idea of your ear’s “curves”, you could apply some pre-emphasis to your music.
(Some vocals will probably become very sibilant, but you could always treat that too, plus if you can’t hear the
excessive sibilance then…no problem).
It will probably sound awful to other people and you’ll have all the neighbourhood dogs howling but so what,
it’s your music, your system, and you can enjoy it the way you want.
As you know, just watch out for excessively loud levels.
but so what,
