We wish to use Adobe Audition 3, with an AAC plug-in, to name songs, save as an MP3 at 320Kb for use in our automation. Is there a better way, other than a lossless original, and if not are we creating another coding generation? Will the MP3 320Kb generation sound much worse than the AAC?
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
AAC to MP3 @320Kb
- Thread starter wking601
- Start date
Better way?
Yes. Called a CD. Save as 44 kHZ 16 bit WAV audio file.
A "red Book" CD has a certain amount of data compression, but is the closest to the original master you're going to find. Saving as a wav file as described above is essentially loss less.
Sure it takes a lot of hard disk space, but large hard drives are cheap.
MP3 is a lossy data compression method. Fine for e-mailing voice commercials, but what's the point to doing this for music.
Unless, of course, you are talking about either urban or country. For those formats, I would suggest saving to an audio cassette. The kind with that ultra-thin tape that stretches the first time you try to play it.
Yes. Called a CD. Save as 44 kHZ 16 bit WAV audio file.
A "red Book" CD has a certain amount of data compression, but is the closest to the original master you're going to find. Saving as a wav file as described above is essentially loss less.
Sure it takes a lot of hard disk space, but large hard drives are cheap.
MP3 is a lossy data compression method. Fine for e-mailing voice commercials, but what's the point to doing this for music.
Unless, of course, you are talking about either urban or country. For those formats, I would suggest saving to an audio cassette. The kind with that ultra-thin tape that stretches the first time you try to play it.
Yes, it's another coding generation, and MP3 tends to handle this especially poorly, likely due to its rather large "small" block size which hinders its ability to handle transients (such as claps, snares, snaps).
If you have no choice, you have no choice, but is MP3 really the only format supported by the automation system? MP2 at 320 or 384 would be preferable to MP3 at 320 (as it handles transcoding much better -- it's a simpler codec). Wave would indeed be best -- even if the source was lossy to begin with, you've avoided a second generation.
///Leif
If you have no choice, you have no choice, but is MP3 really the only format supported by the automation system? MP2 at 320 or 384 would be preferable to MP3 at 320 (as it handles transcoding much better -- it's a simpler codec). Wave would indeed be best -- even if the source was lossy to begin with, you've avoided a second generation.
///Leif
wking601-
Have a look at this extensive post from late last year. You'll get a nice lesson in compression and its problems.
http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=198783.0
Have a look at this extensive post from late last year. You'll get a nice lesson in compression and its problems.
http://boards.radio-info.com/smf/index.php?topic=198783.0
Use MP2 at 384 kbps. MP3 is limited to 320 kbps, but MP2 can go up to 384 kbps, and that's really the only bitrate you want to use.wking601 said:
Of course, a lossless codec such as FLAC, WMA Lossless, or Apple Lossless would be best, but I assume that is not a possibility in this circumstance?
True. Better wording might be that there is minimal data loss, or loss of fidelity with the "red Book" standard. A musician could tell the difference between an original master at 15 or 30 ips on low noise tape (or now, sampled at 96 khz.) compared to a CD made from a PCM master tape.
Still, in this day of terrabyte hard drives for under $100, I can't figure out why anyone would bother storing anything in any kind of lossy scheme. Even MP2, and especially any MP3 configuration.
Still, in this day of terrabyte hard drives for under $100, I can't figure out why anyone would bother storing anything in any kind of lossy scheme. Even MP2, and especially any MP3 configuration.
- Status