Search results

Never thought to try this. I personally can't hear a noticeable difference between 192 and a 16-bit WAV, but haven't run that test yet. And my ears aren't the greatest...

One thing is to make sure the Quality setting on the LAME encoder is set to highest. Some programs that use LAME have a default of "Medium" or something, and it makes a big difference... If I'm uploading to a site that doesn't restrict bitrate, I usually use 192 since (in my opinion) it's the...

eh... I agree. Just bothers me a little when someone accuses me of not knowing what I'm talking about. :rolleyes:

All I remember seeing is covers and people asking when you were going to put up one of your own songs. But that was a long time ago. It's also completely off-topic and I personally couldn't care less. Just wondering. Still can't point out one thing I said that was wrong (besides what I said...

I think anyone who read through it would agree that you don't know what you're talking about. Especially since you can't point out anything incorrect about anything I said. :confused: I don't either though. I only developed software. And made money doing it. Kinda gives me an upper hand when it...

I come back here for the first time in forever and see this... Exposed to not knowing what I'm talking about? :confused: Give me one example? Didn't think so. :D (You still doing covers because you're too unoriginal to come up with anything yourself? Or maybe you finally did?)

I hate using anything less than 192. For a lot of stuff, most people can't tell the difference between 192 and 320... 128 sucks. I think 192 is the best compromise between file size and sound quality. None of that matters if you're uploading to a site that only supports a certain bitrate, like...

You don't even know what you're talking about and you call me ignorant. k

I've been a member here for awhile and it seems every time the topic of normalizing comes up, in-comes the responses to "NEVER normalize", "normalizing will make it sound shitty", etc. :confused: Destructive editing should be kept to a minimum. Obviously, a few gain changes aren't going to...

If that's the case, then yeah, it's bad. But a single, one-time normalization (not RMS normalization) before dithering is not harmful if no more processing will be done on the audio.

Coming from someone who probably just repeats what others say without any actual knowledge of how bit-depth works and what actually happens during normalization or how floating point algorithms work and probably no computer programming background either. But yeah...

There's a lot of misinformation about how bad normalizing is. :rolleyes: If you do it more than once, then yes, it is bad, and you should never have to. If you have everything in the song done, and are happy with how it sounds, have the compression right, etc., then normalizing right before...

It's easy to give general suggestions for EQ, but not for compression. Dynamics are so different from performance to performance, not to mention instruments, songs, etc. so it's impossible. I just start with everything at default settings, and then set the attack time. For a lot of rhythm...

I think PureVolume uses 96KBPS, or it did last time I used it. MySpace uses some weird settings, you might want to try 96 or 128. SoundClick uses 128 unless you pay for an account then you can go up to 320. So when you upload a song at say, 192 or 320 KBPS, and the site is using something like...

I didn't ask for anyone to start arguing... My main goal was just wondering if there is a way to automate the effect of inverting the polarity... I have no desire to become an audio engineer, I'm not even that great at math, was just wondering so I could make my music and be happy...

I know a lot about digital audio and the theory behind it, but I'm not quite sure what phase is? Or polarity? I know they are different but most audio editors call polarity "phase"? For example, recording a stereo guitar track with 2 mics...if you invert the "phase" on one, it produces a really...

Try it with the Martin and post back. :)

Most likely they have someone else tab it out. I'm pretty sure most bands (or the record label, or whoever) will need that to register/copyright the work (and not just the sound recording). The few songs I took the time to write out in something like PowerTab or GuitarPro, ended up sounding...

M-Audio DMP3. Buy one. :D

Does WaveLab have all the CD burning features CD Architect has? If so, then yeah...otherwise...I think CD Architect would be worth the extra $50.