WAV MP3 Comparison

[SouthSIDE Glen]

SouthSIDEGlen, tesla is MUCH more than just someone who had a few cool ideas, i don't mean this offensively, but when i read what you wrote i about fell off my chair. your other comments tend to make sense but think there is alot missing, you are thinking more as a metaphysicist, not as an empirical scientist

Don't get me wrong, I didn't mean to minimize his accomplishments with my comments, it was just a fast way of trying to acknowledge that he was indeed accomplished.

The real metaphysicists are the ones who have developed a cult following around this guy based an all sorts of baloney non-science, untruths, myths,conspiracy theories and downright mysticism. I'm not saying you're one of them; I'm just saying that there's a whole lot out there that unwarrantably romanticizes and deifies Tesla as some kind of hero of the downtrodden, icon of of the rebellious and peri-magician for the wistful, rather than the journeyman scientist he actually was.

I don't have room for that kind of excess angst baggage on my wall, where I instead have my picture of Richard Feynman .

G.

 

[dintymoore]

One thing people should realize about frequency response ranges is that when you read a mic or some speakers only go up to say, 10KHz, that doesn't mean that the sound cuts off abruptly above 10KHz.

Ideally a mic's output is the same as it's input. But as the input frequency gets higher, the mic will put out less and less. So a mic that says it goes to 15 KHz will pick up and put out frequencies at 17 KHz, but they are way softer than they were at the mic's input. Sometimes you can counteract that with eq boosting but you'll be boosting noise too.

If you hook up a 15" bass speaker to an amp and play audio tracks, it will be obvious that the speaker puts out frequencies way above what it's specified upper frequency range is, they will just be soft.

It's up to each company to test and post frequency responses, and some will accept more difference between input and output, so one company might say a mic went to 12 KHz while a more honest company might say 10 KHz.

I think you have to look at who is posting frequency responses, how reputable they are, and more important, just listen.

If you pick up the world's worst violin, one that just sounds horrible, the output frequency range is still great (theoretically 1 Hz to infinite), it just sucks throughout that range.
So it's more important what it sounds like in the middle than at the ends.

 

[mattr]

One thing people should realize about frequency response ranges is that when you read a mic or some speakers only go up to say, 10KHz, that doesn't mean that the sound cuts off abruptly above 10KHz.

Ideally a mic's output is the same as it's input. But as the input frequency gets higher, the mic will put out less and less. So a mic that says it goes to 15 KHz will pick up and put out frequencies at 17 KHz, but they are way softer than they were at the mic's input. Sometimes you can counteract that with eq boosting but you'll be boosting noise too.

If you hook up a 15" bass speaker to an amp and play audio tracks, it will be obvious that the speaker puts out frequencies way above what it's specified upper frequency range is, they will just be soft.

It's up to each company to test and post frequency responses, and some will accept more difference between input and output, so one company might say a mic went to 12 KHz while a more honest company might say 10 KHz.

I think you have to look at who is posting frequency responses, how reputable they are, and more important, just listen.

Errr, I don't think that will be anything new for 95% or more of the people here. Even if they specify whether a range is to -3db, -10db, etc, most people skim over them.

But even frequency response graphs are of limited use. Flat isn't always best, but neither necessarily is 'tailored to a specific use'. Prominent irregularities can sometimes be seen as flaws, and other times can be desirable and exploited to your advantage. People can get far too hung up one the numbers sometimes...

 

[cantthinkofname]

i've just been listening to some old videos of my dad & his brothers playing in the downstairs of a bar, everything sounds great to me, but the drums are just over the notch of painful to the brain, the guitars sound fine, the drums must create a far different frequency that relates far differently than the guitar.

(although live didn't notice at all

 

[dintymoore]

i've just been listening to some old videos of my dad & his brothers playing in the downstairs of a bar, everything sounds great to me, but the drums are just over the notch of painful to the brain, the guitars sound fine, the drums must create a far different frequency that relates far differently than the guitar.

(although live didn't notice at all

If it was recorded with the built in mic on the camcorder, those mics can get overdriven easily by drums. The other instruments might not have the peaks to do that. That's pretty common and might be what you're hearing.

 

[NL5]

I'm a strong believer that 320kbps MP3 compression is fairly transparent in most situations. Heck, 192kbps is indistinguishable by many people.

So, in my opinion... Get LAME 3.98.1 and encode some good 192kbps MP3s for your website. Save the WAVs for a CD.

Great advice. I stream at 320, but 192 is still pretty good, and probably indistinguishable for 99.9% of listeners.

Download and install foobar2000...
http://www.foobar2000.org/

...and the ABX plugin, if it doesn't come with it...
http://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_abx

Load the two files (MP3 and WAV) into the playlist, highlight both of them, scroll down to Utils, then select 'ABX two tracks'.


After clicking OK to where the temp files should be saved, you'll then be presented with a daunting looking test window. No longer do you have the comfort of knowing which is MP3 and which is WAV, they're now just named A and B. The challenge is to flick between A, B, X and Y until you make your mind up about how A and B match up with X and Y (then click the appropriate button).

You probably need to repeat this test 5 or 10 times (they're randomly swapped round every time) which then gives you a fairly clear readout of how accurately you could match them up and the probability that you were guessing each time.


Trust me, the results can be surprising.

Dude! You rock! I love foobar, and had no idea this could be done. Awesome!

 

[cantthinkofname]

If it was recorded with the built in mic on the camcorder, those mics can get overdriven easily by drums. The other instruments might not have the peaks to do that. That's pretty common and might be what you're hearing.

thanks, that's probably it

where I instead have my picture of Richard Feynman .

G.

sounds good too to each their own