• 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

Do radio People Understand Compression?

C

ChiefOperator

I'm curious about your experiences. Visiting my stations, I'm often shocked about how little people understand the differences among wav, mp2, and mp3. I see seasoned production people working with mp3 files and encoding the same file over and over again until it's a 4th or 5th generation mp3 file.

At one station, I see mp3 files imported into iMediatouch, which converts the file into a PCM format. That file will then be exported out as a mp3 file and then later imported again, formatted again to PCM. Of course, while these file sound bad on the air, they sound horrible once streamed.

I explain the need to keep all audio in the PCM format and export files only as wav; however, I get blank stares and the practice continues.

Is it just my experience, or are most folks ignorant about the use of compression? How do your stations handle their audio?
 
No, they don't. I have issued memo upon memo about save all your work as .wav, .mp3 is only for email, etc...

It is finally starting to work. Just keep banging it home. I am a PD of two stations in addition to being the IT Manager for our building. It took me forever to make the labels that I work with understand that we need a .wav download. Now, every promo package has a .wav & a .mp3 version.

I ended up involving my GM in the matter and even took an mp3 through multiple edits and resaves as another mp3 to show the cascading algorithm effect.

I used the stream as an example too. I also set my autoimport folder to write a tag in a field when it imports and mp3, so that it is KNOWN that it came from an MP3, regardless of what it was subsequently converted to. That was a whole problem in it's own. Making them understand that saving an mp3 as a wav doesn't bring it back... Once it's gone, it's gone (unless its WMA Lossless, Apple Lossless, or FLAC).
 
Cheif,

I had the exact same experience when I worked at a radio station. We explained the problem to the marketing and production people over and over again, but they just didn't care and didn't want to listen. I don't know why, but they got in their heads that MP3 is the "standard" and like you said, every edit or whatever they made on the MP3 they saved again as MP3. We kept music under the control and linear, but commercials and jingles got worse and worse...

Nowadays when I visit various radio stations, only a few understand compression and keep everything linear (or most of it), but the majority of stations have very little technical knowledge and support and they have even the music in MP3. I don't need to tell you they sound bad, sometimes horribly bad...


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
Chief, you actually have a choice as to which format MediaTouch Production transcodes the files in, at least as of version 2.XX. You can choose WAV, WMA, MP2, MP3, etc.
 
Maybe a visual would get the idea across to some people. Put together a page with a picture and a graph and some print in 2 or 3 sizes. During a staff meeting to sell the evils of compression, ask someone to copy the visual on your Xerox (or brand of your choice). When the first person brings you back the original and the copy, hand the copy to someone else and ask them to copy it. Repeat about six times. Show the crowd the original and show them the sixth-generation copy. Explain that saving and re-saving and re-re-saving an MP3 file does the same damage to a file.

It they still don't "get the picture".... shoot them and hire replacements. ;D
 
I've seen people transcode a crummy sounding mp3 into wav and having them tell me it will sound better. When I try to tell them that taking a lossy file and encoding it into a lossless format will not magically restore all the missing information they just don't get it.

What's worse is when you hear the end product on the air and they try to blame its poor sound either on engineering or the PD (who is the one with the "magic tweaker" for the processing cabinet).
 
The majority of people don't understand any electronic technology, period.

Not unless they try, and for the high % that do not, it is incomprehensible.

It is possible to polish up the sound of things sometimes, and then save the somewhat restored
version as a lossless file.

I have begun using higher and higher bitrate files in storing music,
but when editing always do so at WAV level.

What bitrate mp3s are these people using?

I once tried multlple edits of a 128 file and was shocked at the degradation after only few generations.

Higher than that seems to stand up well for me as there's no re-digitizing, I'm analog on the airchain.
 
As cheap as storage is, there is absolutely 0 and I mean 0 excuse for using anything other than .wav.

The only reason compression came about was to overcome storage and network limitations in broadcast. All of that is gone. I have 6 Linear stations, 2 Production Rooms, & 5 PD workstations on a Gigabit network streaming Linear PCM 44.1 Audio from 2 File Servers. Never a bump... Not even 5% Network Utilization.

Even if people want all the audio local, you can drop a 1.5 TB Audio Volume in for less than $100.
 
Chief...

I forgot to tell you how I handle it.

I use Audiovault, so it was easy enough for me to hide the compression and default it to none. That way, when they put in an mp3 (which probably 50% of our commercials are delivered as), the only cascade it ever gets is the streaming encoder.

As I said earlier, anything imported into the system that was not from a .wav gets a tag added to it (which I can search for), so I know that it has been an mp3 in it's life. I DO blow mp3 back up to wav on import, but I only do that because there are so many different encoders and headers that I find it makes the automation a little more reliable to work with .wav files only.

I am close to the goal of all of our in house stuff being archived as .wav only. I just keep bashing and educating.... Bashing and educating... That is about all you can do.

As a matter of fact, they asked me the other day if they could email the .wav to clients and other radio stations. I said, of course... Anything can play it and a :30 or :60 easily falls beneath the 10 meg cap of most email providers. So, something I am saying is sinking in.
 
My first thought when I read the title was "No... very few people understand the concept of dynamic range compression." ;D

A great many items these days are distributed only by MP3 by syndicators and record labels, and station employees tend to think "if BMG can do it, so can I," especially when there isn't a staff engineer.
 
TomT said:
You are dealing with the I-Pod generation. Pod people have never heard good audio.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. And no matter how much you attempt to show them that audio can be much, much better, they seem totally indifferent to the concept.
Some people just can't hear any difference in things no matter how much you try to convince them there is one.

A lot of people (even those in the audio industry) don't comprehend what compression is and how it can change sound.
The problem with mp3 and other lossy formats however is it's not just compression you are dealing with. It's a complete
bastardisation of the audio. A lot of it is being removed, and what is left is being changed. Compression artifacts also colour and distort the sound.

Chriscollins is right on the nail with storage - it's cheap and plentiful and there is absolutely NO reason today why anything for air should not be in WAV format.

4000 songs of average length = 150 GB... not even close to filling a 1TB drive.
 
PTBoardOp94 said:
My first thought when I read the title was "No... very few people understand the concept of dynamic range compression." ;D

A great many items these days are distributed only by MP3 by syndicators and record labels, and station employees tend to think "if BMG can do it, so can I," especially when there isn't a staff engineer.
Click to expand...

Sadly, that form of compression is misunderstood as well. Hence the fact that everything is now mastered at a flatline.
 
I like to tall my friends that mp3's are great if you want to listen to a few guitars compete with the drummer for attention.

However, a 100 piece orchestra has way too many voices needing to be heard, and at way too many volume levels ......

ymmv
 
If you've got an older generation (those of us from the days of carts) as offenders, just explain to them that mp3's are just like analog audio tape: the more generations away from the source, the worse they sound. Only it's a lot faster.

It reminds me of when WMGM first went automated overnight in 1998. The computer tech guy (who built his own home-brewed system to do it = and it wasn't me) loaded the station's library into MP3's...but to make them all "fit" he encoded them all at 64Kbps.

When I went back to the company in 2001 tasked with building a new automation/live assist system for their AM station WOND I issued an edict: all spots and other short pieces were to be in WAV only, and made sure we had a large enough hard drive to do it.
 
This thread reminds me of the mini-disk days. Some spots came to us as mp3, then loaded onto a mini-disk, then dubbed to Digilinks. Nobody understood why they sounded so strange on the air. Those of you who had them will remember the lossy compression scheme in the Digilink. That, combined with the lossy compression of the mini-disk, often produced disastrous results.

And yes, so many still don't understand that we're talking about two totally unrelated things - dynamic range compression and data compression. Now that 1 Terrabyte drives are available for $49.95, it is unthinkable that we would use mp3 for anything other than a 24/7 skimmer.

I think it was about five years ago that we finally made it a strict rule that everything was .wav, and only spots destined for emailing to clients or other stations would even be also saved in .mp3. Now, with high-speed internet, why are the agencies still sending in that format?
 
TomT said:
You are dealing with the I-Pod generation.

Pod people have never heard good audio.
Click to expand...

The irony here is that one can store and play back linear, uncompressed music on an iPod. Ipods were never restricted to compressed format files.

Kind Regards,
David
 
David Reaves said:
The irony here is that one can store and play back linear, uncompressed music on an iPod. Ipods were never restricted to compressed format files.
Click to expand...

Quite true. The big thing with the iPod was the RAM memory buffer in them to prevent the drive from constantly spinning, thus extending battery life. Increasing the bitrate just caused the drive to be accessed more frequently, shortening the device's runtime between charges.

I actually use an iPod for a portable test source with a variety of audio files. mp3, wav and AAC. Granted, the limiting factor is the DAC in the device for quick and dirty tests it works.

Somebody previously mentioned the I-Pod generation. It couldn't be summed up better. I started becoming an audiophile back in my early teens but this was back in the 1970's. I often work with students and have yet to see one who has an interest in audio outside of their iPod. Then again, this is the same generation watching television on cell phones, too!
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom