J
jimofnyc
Guest
I don't think you quite understand the fundamentals of coding algorithms. Both MP2s and MP3s can sound better or worse depending on the bit sampling rate. A low bit rate MP2 doesn't sound any better than a low bit rate MP3. In fact it will probably sound worse as MP3 was developed to allow for higher "data compression" levels than MP2s. That's why MP2s (of comparable quality) take up more space (i.e., larger file size) than an MP3 of the same material. Data compression has nothing to do with dynamic range compression - which is what you are talking about when you say you like the sound of a "compressed sounding radio station" Increasing amounts of data compression lead to increasing amounts of "granularity" or distortion and increasing amounts of audio dynamics compression lead to more and more dense sounding audio. Increasing audio compression tends to make everything the same loudness (which can be a plus in competitive situations where the station never wants any quiet or less loud portions of their programming to appear that way on the air) The downside to increasing amounts of audio dynamics compression is that highly compressed audio becomes extremely fatiguing to listen to after a few minutes.
And correctly designed digital circuits do not sound worse than correctly designed analog circuits. In fact, digital circuits have many advantages when it comes to storage and transmission. If they didn't we'd all still be using Ampex 440's or Scully 270's in the production rooms.
Yours truly,
WRDU's first Chief Engineer
> > Doesn't matter, it's now mp2 quality.
>
> Actually it does. The amp in the dubbing process adds a
> level
> of warmth to the CD. Then there's the benefit of riding
> gain during the dubbing on low intros.
>
> Yes, it eventually becomes an MP2. But, the final
> processing is all analog.
> There's no odd re-data compression going on that there would
> be in a digital
> processor.
>
> The vintage analog processing chain allows a cymbal to sound
> like a cymbal
> and not like a trash can lid. And, analog bass always
> sounds better than digital.
>
> Kind of like tube pre-amps and such. It's a nice, subtle
> difference.
>
> Now, if we could just get rid of the automation/MP2's and
> get some human beings!
>
And correctly designed digital circuits do not sound worse than correctly designed analog circuits. In fact, digital circuits have many advantages when it comes to storage and transmission. If they didn't we'd all still be using Ampex 440's or Scully 270's in the production rooms.
Yours truly,
WRDU's first Chief Engineer
> > Doesn't matter, it's now mp2 quality.
>
> Actually it does. The amp in the dubbing process adds a
> level
> of warmth to the CD. Then there's the benefit of riding
> gain during the dubbing on low intros.
>
> Yes, it eventually becomes an MP2. But, the final
> processing is all analog.
> There's no odd re-data compression going on that there would
> be in a digital
> processor.
>
> The vintage analog processing chain allows a cymbal to sound
> like a cymbal
> and not like a trash can lid. And, analog bass always
> sounds better than digital.
>
> Kind of like tube pre-amps and such. It's a nice, subtle
> difference.
>
> Now, if we could just get rid of the automation/MP2's and
> get some human beings!
>