Master quality control

[lawless]

Hello everyone, I was wondering if the process of encoding a wave to mp3 (352kbs) and then decoding it results in a loss of sound quality. Also, if one encodes a wave and then archives it ( RAR or Zip) then unpacks and decodes it...any loss of sound quality ? The reason I ask is because Im on a small label and they sent me a test master of my song they are releasing for me to okay ( check the quality of the master) via mp3 (352kbs) archived (rar). Can anyone shed some light on this subject for me ?


-Lawless



p.s. sorry if this is a double post
my net connection was buggin out
and timed out while submitting

 

[Markus V]

yes, encoding and decoding to lossy formats (e.g. mp3) results in loss of quality... archiving (compressing and extracting), however, doesn't.

*edit: clarified the message

 

[RedStone]

As I have learned, encoding to MP3 requires band pass filtering, which (very roughly - and I could be off as this is a recent discovery for me) means that certain frequencies (the high end is very noticable) are lost in the encoding, and to some extent, other frequencies, both perceptually and hard data wise, may become exagerated as a result ... it's something like that.

The best place to notice this in a 64kbps encode - the high end sounds very washy and there is little to no definition (I assume because you've lost 'x' number of bits of data per second). If the recording is loud enough, you will also get lots of digital clipping ... hoorahh! So, even at 320 kbps you will still loose definition and air. Depending on your encoder, you might notice it alot, or not as much, but it will be noticable if you listen closely.

Still, it goes to show how cool Mp3s are ... not even 1/8 the data, and it can still sort of sound like music!

 

[flatfinger]

The various mp3 algorithms supposedly find where two frequencies are overlapping and beating on each other. the result is the apparent frequency W/O the extra data and masking it took to produce it in the first place. As mentioned by redstone, the highs from 10k on seem to take the brunt of the trunication.

How much is noticable on 1" laptop speaks or earbuds????

you might have to mess with eq BEFORE applying the mp3 process.

 

[flatfinger]

The reason I ask is because Im on a small label and they sent me a test master of my song they are releasing for me to okay ( check the quality of the master) via mp3 (352kbs) archived (rar). Can anyone shed some light on this subject for me ?

This sentence reads like they compressed the mp3 into a rar ??? don't think that results in any spacesavings.

If they sent you a straight rar, go here http://www.rarlab.com/ and decompress it for critical listening,( lots better)

 

[Robert D]

352Kbs Mp3 should sound pretty good, but the very principle of evaluating a master by Mp3 is a bit of a stretch. Free FTP is a better way to transfer the file over the net.