mp3 as original sound source -Sound Forge - PC - MAGIX Community Forums Archive

Subject:mp3 as original sound source Posted by: JimW Date:6/21/2001 11:24:17 AM I'm looking into recording and editing different sounds including instruments and have been looking into different portable recorders (mostly minidisc)that do not exceed around $300. Some new devices are coming onto the market now that allow you to record mp3s at up to 160 Kbs. What do people think about this quality of mp3 as an original sound source. The benefits of space, ease of transfer into the computer, and quality from what I've heard from my own mp3s leads me toward getting one of these devices. Any comments regarding editing, application of effects or quality problems that I should know about?
Subject:RE: mp3 as original sound source Reply by: beetlefan Date:6/21/2001 2:30:59 PM If you can at all avoid storing your sound on mp3, DON'T DO IT! They are O.K. for non critical playback but not as the primary source. All you need to do is make comparisons between an mp3 and the uncompressed source and you can hear what mp3 does to your music. As far as i'm concerned, no mp3 is worth it.
Subject:RE: mp3 as original sound source Reply by: Rednroll Date:6/21/2001 4:30:10 PM Since Sonic foundry finally developed Vegas, I've stuck to nothing but PC based recorders. If you want portability.......go buy a laptop. You can get a good Celeron 700Mhz for about $800-$900, or wait like I'm doing for the new AMD Athlon processor laptops to come down in price and then you'll have a smokin recording studio in something the size of a notepad. A 20 gig laptop hard drive will hold a lot of uncompressed Waves audio. Regards, Brian Franz
Subject:RE: mp3 as original sound source Reply by: JimW Date:6/21/2001 7:13:24 PM http://www.archos.com/products/product_500201.html The above link is what I am talking about. I imagine that a high enough quality mp3, that is capable of tricking our ears 100% is good enough for an original source. Many mp3s are recorded at 128 Kbs which encoder software sometimes calls CD quality. I know that they can sometimes sound obviously bad, but I've reencoded them at 160 Kbs and they seemed fine. If some dog or other animal or bird can hear quality problems that no human can, then so what. I'm thinking that its a possibility that when certain effects are applied to an mp3, then the quality may be an issue, but I don't have the experience manipulating mp3s in this way. Does Sound Forge work with mp3s the same as with other audio formats? I'm hoping for a technical explanation if it is true that high quality mp3s are an inferior format. Thanks again. Jim
Subject:RE: mp3 as original sound source Reply by: beetlefan Date:6/22/2001 1:17:41 AM All You need to do is make an A/B comparison to see just what the mp3 compression is doing to your music. Sure, the higher you get the less the differences are, but even 192kbps is woefully inadequate for serious consideration. The analogy of how a typical mp3 sounds is analog cassette tape without the hiss. No, you don't have to be a dog to hear the differences. But if you have bad hearing I imagine the results would be even more pronounced. BTW, I use Cool Edit 2000 as my primary mp3 encoder. It is one of the best. SF is about the same.

Subject:mp3 as original sound source

Posted by: JimW

Date:6/21/2001 11:24:17 AM

I'm looking into recording and editing different sounds including instruments and have been looking into different portable recorders (mostly minidisc)that do not exceed around $300. Some new devices are coming onto the market now that allow you to record mp3s at up to 160 Kbs. What do people think about this quality of mp3 as an original sound source. The benefits of space, ease of transfer into the computer, and quality from what I've heard from my own mp3s leads me toward getting one of these devices. Any comments regarding editing, application of effects or quality problems that I should know about?

Subject:RE: mp3 as original sound source

Reply by: beetlefan

Date:6/21/2001 2:30:59 PM

If you can at all avoid storing your sound on mp3, DON'T DO IT! They are O.K. for non critical playback but not as the primary source. All you need to do is make comparisons between an mp3 and the uncompressed source and you can hear what mp3 does to your music. As far as i'm concerned, no mp3 is worth it.

Subject:RE: mp3 as original sound source

Reply by: Rednroll

Date:6/21/2001 4:30:10 PM

Since Sonic foundry finally developed Vegas, I've stuck to nothing but PC based recorders. If you want portability.......go buy a laptop. You can get a good Celeron 700Mhz for about $800-$900, or wait like I'm doing for the new AMD Athlon processor laptops to come down in price and then you'll have a smokin recording studio in something the size of a notepad. A 20 gig laptop hard drive will hold a lot of uncompressed Waves audio.

Regards,
Brian Franz

Subject:RE: mp3 as original sound source

Reply by: JimW

Date:6/21/2001 7:13:24 PM

http://www.archos.com/products/product_500201.html

The above link is what I am talking about.
I imagine that a high enough quality mp3, that is capable of tricking our ears 100% is good enough for an original source. Many mp3s are recorded at 128 Kbs which encoder software sometimes calls CD quality. I know that they can sometimes sound obviously bad, but I've reencoded them at 160 Kbs and they seemed fine. If some dog or other animal or bird can hear quality problems that no human can, then so what.

I'm thinking that its a possibility that when certain effects are applied to an mp3, then the quality may be an issue, but I don't have the experience manipulating mp3s in this way. Does Sound Forge work with mp3s the same as with other audio formats? I'm hoping for a technical explanation if it is true that high quality mp3s are an inferior format.

Thanks again.
Jim

Subject:RE: mp3 as original sound source

Reply by: beetlefan

Date:6/22/2001 1:17:41 AM

All You need to do is make an A/B comparison to see just what the mp3 compression is doing to your music. Sure, the higher you get the less the differences are, but even 192kbps is woefully inadequate for serious consideration. The analogy of how a typical mp3 sounds is analog cassette tape without the hiss.

No, you don't have to be a dog to hear the differences. But if you have bad hearing I imagine the results would be even more pronounced.

BTW, I use Cool Edit 2000 as my primary mp3 encoder. It is one of the best. SF is about the same.