IDM Mailing Archive

There have been times when I have not released tracks on the internet because I cant get them to encode properly. Especially when you have a low, extended kick, and maybe a quick hihat or something going at the same time... it sounds terrible. Has anyone experimented with windows media? -----Original Message----- From: peeing knots [mailto:ultraknots@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2000 10:02 AM To: IDM@hyperreal.org Subject: [idm] Re: something about bad MP3's yup, u r right, it all has to do with over-compressed mastertracks, which then being converted to mp3 formats, sound bubbly & distorted bass-less. The compression-algorithms can't handle the squashy compressed stereo-wav. I realised it by converting own, compr. trax to stereo 44.1kH mp3 format & it sucks... `SedarkA´ :(Pee-N-yoU): http://pnu.widerstand.org ______________________ ---------------------------------------- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 13:46:07 +0200 To: idm@hyperreal.org From: Irene McC <substar@iafrica.com> Subject: distortion Message-id: <39FECD1F.18772.11D2B79@localhost> Just a general MP3 related question: a lot of MP3's I'm listening to are distorted, either at the top end which clips, or the bass which just goes "bbsshhh" - and looking at the actual curve, it makes standing squared waves. Presumably this is not due to the extraction, but comes from the original source - is it because people use huge compression on their sound files? Is there any way around it? Even if I convert my own CD's to MP3, I cannot predict which ones will come out distorted (and many do). Selecting the "normalize" function does not seem to help - sometimes it even boots the gain. I * --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 10:39:45AM -0800, Wheeler, Dan wrote:

quoted 4 lines There have been times when I have not released tracks on the internet

> There have been times when I have not released tracks on the internet > because I cant get them to encode properly. Especially when you have a low, > extended kick, and maybe a quick hihat or something going at the same > time... it sounds terrible. Has anyone experimented with windows media?

This has happened to me several times... Especially with square bass. Try using a better encoder like fraunhofer or lame. -- :: atomly :: atomly@atomly.com | atomly@atdot.org | atomly@curiousnetworks.com http://www.atomly.com | http://www.mp3.com/atomly --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

The problem with MP3 is one of two things: crappy encoders, and mispreparation of the source material. If you want to have the best quality MP3s, you have to address those issues. Wavelab 3.0 has a 'super-high-quality' encoder that runs directly on 24bit wav files. When I mp3 my own material with this and the results are phenomenal. As far as mis-preparation goes, normalizing to 0dB (full code) is the quickest way to make the encoder screw up. It seems OK when I normalize to -0.03dB. It's also a good idea to compress the audio to raise the average level to -12dB or so. Quiet material interacts as poorly with the encoder as overly loud material. And in general, you'll get better results if you bandwidth limit the source material -- use a high pass filter set to roll off below 20hz, and a low pass to roll off about 16khz. The high end rolloff isn't that damaging to electronic music, but it can potentially make high quality acoustic recordings sound worse. Most of the MP3s you hear were either ripped directly from CD by an 'all in one' program that doesn't really accomodate differences in program material, or recorded analog by amateurs using cheap sound cards. I've heard MP3s transferred from vinyl where it was obvious that the needle needed replacing. I've also heard vinyl transfers run through 'vinyl restoration' filters with extreme noise reduction settings; that is guaranteed to sound shitty. A well prepared audio master, run through a good compressor, will not sound as good as the original, but it should be free of the most obvious artifacts. kent williams -- kent@avalon.net http://jump.to/cornwarning -- Iowa's First Techno Record Label http://www.mp3.com/chaircrusher -- tunes --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

Just find some encoder with VBR function and try to compress with lower limit of 192 bps. I personally use CDEx software with VBR 0 (maximum quality minimum compression) and minimum 256 bps. Sounds good enough. 6x time compression. 128 bps will always sound crappy. Alien np. Detroit Escalator - Black Buildings EP (recommended stuff) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

At 09:12 AM 11/1/2000 +0200, Konstantin Minko wrote:

quoted 4 lines Just find some encoder with VBR function and try to compress with lower

>Just find some encoder with VBR function and try to compress with lower >limit of 192 bps. I personally use CDEx software with VBR 0 (maximum quality >minimum compression) and minimum 256 bps. Sounds good enough. 6x time >compression. 128 bps will always sound crappy.

Regarding the 128 bps, it really depends on the encoder. Fraunhoffer (sp) encoders tend to be the best, and if you use the codec in a good program, anything above 128 will essentially sound like 128. Of course, finding good codecs is often a problem, and a lot are commercial, so yes, using a higher bitrate is a good solution. Less compression = less problems. One interesting aspect of encoding is the VBR, or variable bit-rate, encoding capabilities of the latest version of AcidPro. In the export function, it can export to mp3 and use variable bitrate, meaning that it detects when there is more sound (uses less compression) or more silence (uses more compression). It actually seems to be highly efficient too, meaning that there aren't many mistakes, and you have well-compressed areas where there isn't much music, and the 'important' parts with music aren't compressed as bad. The result - efficient and often smaller mp3's of a surprisingly good quality. You end up having an mp3 that changes bitrates a lot, sure, but it just make's winamp/etc.'s screen upset - it doesn't affect playback. It's too bad there aren't more encoders like this. However, I'm not sure how something like that would work on decompressing... cheers, /derek --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

On 1 Nov 2000, EggyToast wrote re RE: [idm] Re: something about bad M:

quoted 1 line One interesting aspect of encoding is the VBR, or variable bit-rate,

> One interesting aspect of encoding is the VBR, or variable bit-rate,

I've done some experimenting: encoded the same track - total running time 6:46 mins, at both Variable Bit Rate using the defaults and standard 128 MP3 extraction. The VBR file weighs in at 5,513KB and the 128 file at 6,349KB. On playback, the VBR file has audible clicks and pops that are not in either the original nor the 128 version. So that's not a preferable choice from my point of view (using Xing's Audio Catalyst). I believe it's the compression that the artists / producers use on their original source material - it boosts the gain phenomenally, and I think the algorithm of the MP3 ripper cannot deal with that successfully, which results in a standing wave. As an example : take any of the noisier tracks off A Shocking Hobby, use your ripper of choice and encode to a standard of 128 Kbit's. Listen back - is there any distortion (that was *not* on the original)? NOW re-inflate the MP3 you've just made to a .wav file and using any wave editor, *look at the sine wave*. Can you spot any squared waves? To do this (compressing the MP3), I have not gone to an intermediary wave file, but used the direct ripping process. I'm getting an unusable end result - very badly distorting audio. If anybody can tell me which ripper gives you satisfactory results, PLEASE let me know ! Apparently Blade works well, but does not rip directly, only from a wave source file. Thank you for your time - I'd really appreciate your comments. I * --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org

quoted 14 lines a free LAME based ripper for windows is cdex

> a free LAME based ripper for windows is cdex > > http://www.cdex.n3.net/ > > which unfortunately doesn't seem to be answering at the mo, so a > mirror site > is ... > > http://softwarecenter.net/cdex/index.html > > i use cdex myself, but mainly for cd -> wav so i can't say for certain > whether its any good, but it may be worth a try. > > -martin

I use it for mp3 encoding and enjoying it very much. Never encountered problems with VBR as well - maybe because I never use 128bps or maybe because it is easily customizable in this software? Recommended. Alien --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: idm-unsubscribe@hyperreal.org For additional commands, e-mail: idm-help@hyperreal.org