mp3 conversion quality

ConureDude · Post by **ConureDude** » Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:25 pm

This is a really basic question, and I'm sorry to sound like such a newb, but...

If I have a 24-bit file, do I have to first convert it to 16-bit before using DP5's MP3 bounce to disk (with LAME)? Or can the bounce to disk deal with a 24-bit file? If I do have to convert to 16, can I go to MP3 in one step using (for instance) the Master Limiter with dithering?

Thanks for any help,

jlaudon · Post by **jlaudon** » Wed Feb 20, 2008 7:38 pm

You can go direct from 24bit (if you're posting it on the web, sometimes it helps to convert the sample rate to 44.1 first, as 48 files play slower)

chamelion · Post by **chamelion** » Wed Feb 20, 2008 10:32 pm

My format converter of choice is a free app called Switch Plus I use it all the time to convert .wav and .aiff files to mp3 for uploading (for clients). I've found it to be very stable, and simple to use. Top marks from me.

Cheers,

Geoff

YouTube · Post by **James Steele** » Wed Feb 20, 2008 10:41 pm

Kawentzmann wrote:Spark uses the original Fraunhofer Institut codec and that shows.

Is there any software out there that uses this? I remember years ago in OS 9 days I downloaded this codec and through some very complex installation, etc. and was able to encode some MP3s using the Fraunhofer codec and it sounded VERY good... much better than anything else at the time. It took longer to process but the results were outstanding!

doodles · Post by **doodles** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:46 am

i still send all my mp's at 320. it's not that much larger file size, and sound quality is a massive difference. i can't stand listening to mp/3 done at around 160 - al the hats and top-end become grim!

kassonica · Post by **kassonica** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:08 am

doodles wrote:i still send all my mp's at 320. it's not that much larger file size, and sound quality is a massive difference. i can't stand listening to mp/3 done at around 160 - al the hats and top-end become grim!

Yup although with lame 160 is ok if good source file and mix.

But 192 my usual cut off point.

224 in lame is pretty damn good and i can't hear much difference between that and 320.

320 for ANYTHING else though (well for anything you care about)

chamelion · Post by **chamelion** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:16 am

doodles wrote:i still send all my mp's at 320. it's not that much larger file size, and sound quality is a massive difference. i can't stand listening to mp/3 done at around 160 - al the hats and top-end become grim!

For what it's worth, this is Switch's bitrate menu:

kassonica · Post by **kassonica** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 2:07 am

chamelion wrote:
doodles wrote:i still send all my mp's at 320. it's not that much larger file size, and sound quality is a massive difference. i can't stand listening to mp/3 done at around 160 - al the hats and top-end become grim!
For what it's worth, this is Switch's bitrate menu:

ooh 8kps my god i can not even imagine what that must sound like and i hope i never ever hear it.

I fooled around with 32 once years ago for a joke and IT WAS NOT FUNNY

chamelion · Post by **chamelion** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:09 am

kassonica wrote: ooh 8kps my god i can not even imagine what that must sound like and i hope i never ever hear it.

Don't knock it mate - if you're working on "Concerto for Crap", 8kps may br just what you need. It gives the term 'Lo res' a whole new connotation.

Geoff

Shooshie · Post by **Shooshie** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:52 am

Funny, I actually have that sitting on my hard drive. Didn't even realize it until I read your post and started thinking "that sounds familiar... I wonder..." and sure enough it was there.

Thanks for reminding me.

Shooshie

monkey man · Post by **monkey man** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 5:41 am

James Steele wrote:
Kawentzmann wrote:Spark uses the original Fraunhofer Institut codec and that shows.
Is there any software out there that uses this? I remember years ago in OS 9 days I downloaded this codec and through some very complex installation, etc. and was able to encode some MP3s using the Fraunhofer codec and it sounded VERY good... much better than anything else at the time. It took longer to process but the results were outstanding!

Spark does, and you can still use it in Tiger with TC's "Tiger patch".
Unfortunately it's broken under Leo (I think - too many anomalies on my system to risk checking at the moment).

I agree though, James, and as I said much earlier in the thread, Spark was the bee's knees when it came to quality conversions.
It even had an "enhanced" mode on top of the Fraunhofer codec, which made the process (if you chose it) even lengthier, but it was well worth it.

kassonica · Post by **kassonica** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 7:22 am

chamelion wrote:
kassonica wrote: ooh 8kps my god i can not even imagine what that must sound like and i hope i never ever hear it.
Don't knock it mate - if you're working on "Concerto for Crap", 8kps may br just what you need. It gives the term 'Lo res' a whole new connotation.

Geoff

bottom res

ToBeJazz · Post by **ToBeJazz** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:49 am

James Steele wrote: Is there any software out there that uses this? I remember years ago in OS 9 days I downloaded this codec and through some very complex installation, etc. and was able to encode some MP3s using the Fraunhofer codec and it sounded VERY good... much better than anything else at the time. It took longer to process but the results were outstanding!

Pro Tools seems to use Fraunhofer codec when Bounce To Disk to mp3. Always sounded very good to me, wonder how it would be A/B test with LAME.

...Tobias

MOTUnation.com

mp3 conversion quality

24 bit encoding in DP5 Bounce To Disk?