wav versus mp3 @192

[trentonleonard]

is there that much of a sound quality difference

[dand1996]

yes, muchos

[trentonleonard]

thanks i'll just split my waves and burn instead of burning the mp3 to cd

[Pablo Escobar]

wav's are so much better than mp3...we have a lot of newbies who cut mp3's but don't cut them DAO, they cut them TAO

[rdots1]

Frank,

I admit, I am one of those newbies. I record based on what I have read and trial & error, and it's adequate for most. That's why I said my copy of the Cincy show was not the best quality. I know there must be better. I would greatly appreciate some enlightenment.

[trentonleonard]

wav's are so much better than mp3...we have a lot of newbies who cut mp3's but don't cut them DAO, they cut them TAO

what does tao and dao stand for?

[RinglingRingling]

is there that much of a sound quality difference

.wav files are like 360+kbs/sec, mp3s at 192 kbs/sec there is some difference. Of course, with .wav/cda files, you have 8 mb/min as a general rule, at 192, you have 1.5 mb/min so putting that on your mp3 player...

[Pablo Escobar]

wav's are so much better than mp3...we have a lot of newbies who cut mp3's but don't cut them DAO, they cut them TAO

what does tao and dao stand for?

When you burn wav files DAO and TAO are crucial to the burn.

DAO = is disc at once (seemless, flowing of tracks into each other)
TAO = is track at once (2 sec pause between songs) *no one really uses TAO anymore*

when doing live shows you want all the tracks to ' go into each other', so DAo is a must when you burn a show to cd.

[Pablo Escobar]

Frank,

I admit, I am one of those newbies. I record based on what I have read and trial & error, and it's adequate for most. That's why I said my copy of the Cincy show was not the best quality. I know there must be better. I would greatly appreciate some enlightenment.

Well, its not about quality b/c the show sounds good. When it comes to live shows, I'm anal (amost most of us tapers) are nuts for DAO burning.

What I recommend is listen to a live buffett show, and see if you get aggravated by a 2 sec pause/gap between songs. Then you'll see what I am talking about. Because I know that I do, and again; it could be b/c I am anal about taping, and the whole process from taping/editing/burning.

[Pablo Escobar]

http://www.311unity.com/mp3VSwav.php


This is info on MP3 vs WAV from my friends website on taping a very cool band, 311. It has info and pictures comparing wav lengths to mp3 lengths.


The higher the sound quality the better...that's why .wav is the best way to go

[silverbetty]

Pablo, these are some great posts with a lot of useful info.

[parrotpartygod]

is there that much of a sound quality difference

I LOVE to surf on ocean wav's! That's My Choice! FINZ UP!!!

[trentonleonard]

i could def. tell the diff. my copy of the pine knob replay sounds great
as .wav and no pauses

[Pablo Escobar]

i could def. tell the diff. my copy of the pine knob replay sounds great
as .wav and no pauses

Rock Steady. See what I've been talking about? It sounds so much better!

[trentonleonard]

so much cleaner and louder they sound as good as the official release live cds

[parrotpartygod]

[RinglingRingling]

http://www.311unity.com/mp3VSwav.php


This is info on MP3 vs WAV from my friends website on taping a very cool band, 311. It has info and pictures comparing wav lengths to mp3 lengths.


The higher the sound quality the better...that's why .wav is the best way to go

"If you are using the files solely for your own personal use, feel free to convert to MP3. When converting to MP3, I recommend using a bit rate of 192 or higher. Again, no MP3 is of equal quality to that of a WAV file, and all MP3's have some sort of distortion in them due to their LOSSY compression scheme. But, the distortion found in MP3 bit rates of 192 and higher is not very audible to the human ear. "

[Pablo Escobar]

http://www.311unity.com/mp3VSwav.php


This is info on MP3 vs WAV from my friends website on taping a very cool band, 311. It has info and pictures comparing wav lengths to mp3 lengths.


The higher the sound quality the better...that's why .wav is the best way to go

"If you are using the files solely for your own personal use, feel free to convert to MP3. When converting to MP3, I recommend using a bit rate of 192 or higher. Again, no MP3 is of equal quality to that of a WAV file, and all MP3's have some sort of distortion in them due to their LOSSY compression scheme. But, the distortion found in MP3 bit rates of 192 and higher is not very audible to the human ear. "

My opinion, as probably the most experienced taper here that tapes live shows and internet [re]boardcasts is that .wav is the higher and better sounding quality. Like the above post says, if you are using it for personal use, then mp3 is the way to go b/c the avg novice taper doesn't know anything about mp3 vs .wav, they just know what is the easiest way to get the show to cd. Once you have taped a dozen shows of any of a variety, you will slowly see how .wav is crucial to a great sounding show than mp3 as a decent sounding show. If we want all of our buffett - sirius tapes to come out well, I recommend recording to the highest bitrate possible on what tapers have, and what consists of their rig, and when the post converting process happens, convert to .wac, it's the easiest and best sounding way to go, b/c in all events we want all of our tapes to sound better and wav is the way to go.

[Down2TheC]

Yes there is a difference in the wav and 192kbps, but not for recording Sirius. Pretty sure satellite radio uses HE-AAC (MPEG4) which means the best you're getting is 128kbps. I'm guessing bumping to 192kbps is smart to ensure you don't miss a bit in the A2D conversion (unless you're digital from soup to nuts) and there's relatively little cost in size. But keeping it in wav is not going to improve the sound quality.

[ShortFatGuy]

.wav files are like 360+kbs/sec, mp3s at 192 kbs/sec there is some difference.

Aren't WAVs (as in those ripped from a CD) 1,411 kbps?

At least that's what Wikipedia says.