The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Am I going mad? Special Ef­fects Plugins
Old 19th June 2018
  #61
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Not to mention the fact that it’s playback system dependent - you’d need to somehow make sure your file only plays back at a lower bitrate. Otherwise you’ll get double lossy encoding.
well then, it should sound twice as "tape-like"!
Old 23rd June 2018
  #62
Lives for gear
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
Lower bitrate MP3s definitely do roll off high end...look at them in a spectrum analyser!
Also low sample rate roll off the high end. In MP3 this is not a linear process, and the high end cut on 128 is not too extreme if encoded well comparing to a tape. Generally it rolls off above 16K in my experience if encoded properly. Which gives more breath to arrive to the harsh cutoff point on a 44.1 converter.

Maybe another option why I might like it better is because the dither is rolled down? I always had some problem listening to dithers that have been noiseshaped in some ways and definitively some dither sounds better than others. It also add lot of information in a mix. Maybe and I say maybe the 128 ease off those and makes it more pleasant to listen to?

I also 90% of the time prefer the original CD version to the "remastered" maybe this has to do with that?

I don't know I'm just theorising while other are purely hating I see and some of those who write above will never admit they would prefer a 128 even if they do, even on highest end monitors. They will always be in pure class of audio snob who try to sell their extreme knowledge, the same ones who clipped converters to get on with "what everyone wants loud mixes". I am too, not to worry lol

Cheers
Old 23rd June 2018
  #63
Lives for gear
 

Thread Starter
Your theory is flawed and you really do t know what you are talking about.

If high end is rolled off and then noise would be added then there would be no roll off on the spectrum analyser.

All digital Audio is made by sine waves combined. The MP3 recreate some of the frequencies but it doesn't add noise (except if you consider the quick missing of sound noise - the famous wobbling if you listen the MS in an mp3).
That wobbly while horrible on its own is a masked noise and a pure algorythm shaped it to be totally hidden behind the sound.

Usually MP3 are less dense than the original wav files removing the frequencies which are masked.

Also high end roll off is not a low pass filter but again something which evolves following the music. And as I expressed just above maybe helps out removing the artefact added by dithering and noiseshaping making the MP3 more pleasant and relaxing to listen to



Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
psycho_monkey has already explained that at 128 Kbps, the highs are most certainly rolled-off but even more importantly, your entire premise is flawed. The stuff that is perceptually masked doesn't get discarded. It gets replaced by random noise.

The signal coming out of an MP3 decoder is actually more complex than what goes in due to the random nature of the noise used to replace masked frequencies (it isn't just frequency masking, it is also temporal masking but let's keep things simple for discussion's sake).




Those people are deaf. (j/k)

Alistair
Old 23rd June 2018
  #64
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
Your theory is flawed and you really do t know what you are talking about.

If high end is rolled off and then noise would be added then there would be no roll off on the spectrum analyser.


Alistair
Old 24th June 2018
  #65
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
Your theory is flawed and you really do t know what you are talking about.
That is hilarious. YOU are lecturing UnderTow with your Wikipedia quotes and telling him he doesn't know what he is talking about!
Old 25th June 2018
  #66
I’ve just never heard a 128kbps MP3 that’s I’ve preferred to full res - any style.

I accept that for some situations, it might not make too much difference or maybe in extreme moments even enhance (I’m thinking electronic style primarily).

But I don’t hear smooth rolling off or anything like that. I hear digital hash and cymbal decays becoming harsher, and detail being lost.

I spent a lot of time around 2001-2005 transcribing pop songs from MP3s - it was a lot easier to do with a better quality MP3! And that wasn’t the case with some iTunes downloads and the like.

At any rate, it’s a delivery format, not a production format. You need to supply uncompressed audio to distribution because you can’t control what happens down the line, so it’s really a non-starter as far as production audio goes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ayskura View Post
Also low sample rate roll off the high end. In MP3 this is not a linear process, and the high end cut on 128 is not too extreme if encoded well comparing to a tape. Generally it rolls off above 16K in my experience if encoded properly. Which gives more breath to arrive to the harsh cutoff point on a 44.1 converter.

Maybe another option why I might like it better is because the dither is rolled down? I always had some problem listening to dithers that have been noiseshaped in some ways and definitively some dither sounds better than others. It also add lot of information in a mix. Maybe and I say maybe the 128 ease off those and makes it more pleasant to listen to?

I also 90% of the time prefer the original CD version to the "remastered" maybe this has to do with that?

I don't know I'm just theorising while other are purely hating I see and some of those who write above will never admit they would prefer a 128 even if they do, even on highest end monitors. They will always be in pure class of audio snob who try to sell their extreme knowledge, the same ones who clipped converters to get on with "what everyone wants loud mixes". I am too, not to worry lol

Cheers
Old 25th June 2018
  #67
Lives for gear
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post


Alistair
What?
Old 25th June 2018
  #68
Lives for gear
 

Thread Starter
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
That is hilarious. YOU are lecturing UnderTow with your Wikipedia quotes and telling him he doesn't know what he is talking about!
Definitively he doesn't know what he's talking about saying that noise replace audio in an MP3.

And no it's not Wikipedia, I did study digital audio and MP3 compression during my university... I might actually know something on the matter even if you might not agree
Mentioned Products
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump