exprting to mp3!!

  • Thread starter Thread starter jayjayjay123
  • Start date Start date
J

jayjayjay123

New member
I am using Sonar 8 Proucer Edition and my sound quality is exactly the way I want until I export to mp3 and play the song through iTunes. I can't understand how I'm losing so much sound quality going from a .wav file to a .mp3. Is there a professional plug-in and program that is used to reduce file size but still keep the sound quality?

Any help or points in the right direction would be greatly appreciated.

Jeremy
 
Try exporting to a wav and then use iTunes to do the conversion. How does just the wav sound in iTunes?

Also, what bitrate are you using for the mp3?
 
TetraFish said:
Try exporting to a wav and then use iTunes to do the conversion. How does just the wav sound in iTunes?

Also, what bitrate are you using for the mp3?
Click to expand...

^^^^^This^^^^^
iTunes does a fair conversion....and like TF, I wonder about your bitrate as well.
 
There's a bunch of different bit rates you can save mp3's at and the higher ones use more memory and sound better.

You should be using the 320 kbps bit rate. The lower ones like 128 sound pretty wretched.

Personally I think all mp3's sound terrible but they are convenient.
 
Probably a dumb question, but are you listening to iTunes on the same speakers as your wav files??
 
Chili said:
Probably a dumb question, but are you listening to iTunes on the same speakers as your wav files??
Click to expand...

Not a dumb question at all. I was thinking the same thing. MP3's don't degrade the sound to the extent that it sounds THAT much worse. Seems to me that the Waves are being listened to in the "studio", and the MP3's are being listened to on an Ipod or whatever.
 
RAMI said:
Not a dumb question at all. I was thinking the same thing. MP3's don't degrade the sound to the extent that it sounds THAT much worse. Seems to me that the Waves are being listened to in the "studio", and the MP3's are being listened to on an Ipod or whatever.
Click to expand...

Yup.

I often export to mp3 at 192. And when I listen on the same speakers in my studio, I can't hear a difference. Maybe my ears are filled with mud, but it works fine for me!
 
Since mp3's only use a fraction of the memory that AIF's or WAV's do it would be against physics for them to sound the same. I have always rejected mp3's as unusable.

For me mp3's saved at any bit rate sound drastically worse than AIF's or WAV's.

I've always heard that, and at the same time I am at a loss as to why many people can't tell a "Bb" from a "B", to me they sound completely different from each other, as different as yellow and red.
 
WhiteStrat said:
Yup.

I often export to mp3 at 192. And when I listen on the same speakers in my studio, I can't hear a difference. Maybe my ears are filled with mud, but it works fine for me!
Click to expand...
I agree 100%. They may not sound as good, but for there to be a DRASTIC difference, there's probably something wrong in someone's conversion method that's screwing up their MP3's. If anyone tried telling me they can hear anything more than a slight difference between a 320kps MP3 and a wav, they're full of shit.
 
RAMI said:
I agree 100%. They may not sound as good, but for there to be a DRASTIC difference, there's probably something wrong in someone's conversion method that's screwing up their MP3's. If anyone tried telling me they can hear anything more than a slight difference between a 320kps MP3 and a wav, they're full of shit.
Click to expand...

Well, I do, and if you want to decide I'm full of shit there's not much I can do about it. :)
 
dintymoore said:
I've always heard that, and at the same time I am at a loss as to why many people can't tell a "Bb" from a "B", to me they sound completely different from each other, as different as yellow and red.
Click to expand...

Some people can't tell yellow from red. It's usually genetic.
 
Until manufacturers start coming out with 500gb to 1tb portable players in a really compact casing (like smaller than your iPod casing) and at a really cheap price, I'll stick with high bit rate mp3's (as suggested here 320 and up). I can stick more albums in a smaller storage space with mp3's. WAVs just hog too much space. I agree, the diff in quality between WAV and 320 up mp3's is negligible.

Besides, if you're streaming your music online, it's more practical to use the smaller sized mp3's as far as loading time is concerned.
 
dintymoore said:
I've always heard that, and at the same time I am at a loss as to why many people can't tell a "Bb" from a "B", to me they sound completely different from each other, as different as yellow and red.
Click to expand...

But can you tell the difference from a "Cb" and a "B"?
 
Another thing to to look at is what steps are you taking during the conversion?

Are you exporting as mp3 directly from Sonar or exporting out to a wave file and then converting with another app?

The mp3 function in Sonar is a purchased module so most folks bypass it and use lame-based solutions.

There's a few settings you can tweak in the Sonar export process that keeps your music sounding like you want it.
 
I have the mp3 exporter in Sonar. I've had the best success exporting it as a wav and then converting it in itunes. So far that's the best sound I've got. When I use the mp3 exporter in Sonar these are the settings:

Channel Format: Stereo
Sample Rate: 48000
Bit Depth: 16
Dithering: Triangular
Bit Rate: 320

Anything I should be doing differently??
 
Jayjay, when I looked at your settings, DITHERING immediately jumped out at me not because I know the subject but instead it made me ask myself... what the heck is dithering??? and it has a shape???

So I key-worded Triangular Dithering. I pulled up two forums that might give some insight. At this point it's still all greek to me I have to re-read when I have more time but there are some great explanations and analogies.

You probably already figured out it's not dithering in your case but if it is then these forums might shed some light. Hope this helps.

http://forum.recordingreview.com/f8/what-dithering-do-i-need-do-7013/

http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=38065
 
mgjr73 said:
Jayjay, when I looked at your settings, DITHERING immediately jumped out at me not because I know the subject but instead it made me ask myself... what the heck is dithering??? and it has a shape???

So I key-worded Triangular Dithering. I pulled up two forums that might give some insight. At this point it's still all greek to me I have to re-read when I have more time but there are some great explanations and analogies.

You probably already figured out it's not dithering in your case but if it is then these forums might shed some light. Hope this helps.

http://forum.recordingreview.com/f8/what-dithering-do-i-need-do-7013/

http://forum.audacityteam.org/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=38065
Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry too much about spending any time on dithering. It's not as if you'll hear the difference between different dither "shapes". Actually, it's not as if you'll hear dithering at all......Well, with the exception of those who claim to have good enough ears to hear a BIG difference between a 320kps MP3, and a wav file. :rolleyes:
 
dintymoore said:
Since mp3's only use a fraction of the memory that AIF's or WAV's do it would be against physics for them to sound the same. I have always rejected mp3's as unusable.

For me mp3's saved at any bit rate sound drastically worse than AIF's or WAV's.

I've always heard that, and at the same time I am at a loss as to why many people can't tell a "Bb" from a "B", to me they sound completely different from each other, as different as yellow and red.
Click to expand...

Gives me a kind of orangey sensation! :D:D






:cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top