So when you guys render, DL, whatever the term you use is do you do WAV or MP3

FortyEight

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Jul 1, 2020
Posts
1,670
Age
50
Location
Southeastern Wisconsin
Just curious what the standard is... I was under the impression WAVs are the higher quality and better sounding files. And my ears seemed to agree with that.

But at the same time maybe people are using MP3s and are fine with it and sounds good?

@mexicanyella I'm not asking to prove a point or anything, I'm just curious as to what everyone else does and thinks for reference sake. I love the bass track!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

loudboy

Tele-Holic
Joined
May 21, 2003
Posts
648
Location
Sedona, Arizona
Everything .wav, at whatever the resolution you're working in. For me, that's generally 44.1/24-bit. That's also what gets sent out for mastering.

I will send out reference mixes to the client as 320KB mp3s, which are close enough to get the idea across, as far as approving mixes, etc.
 

naveed211

Friend of Leo's
Joined
May 16, 2009
Posts
3,780
Location
Iowa
MP3s are fine and sound good. I do use them for convenience when I email, typically.

I can understand why guys would want to preserve the very highest level of quality for reasons of pride, or because their studio has a lot of really awesome sounding gear and they want the full potential of that realized.

But realistically for anyone who is going to hear it outside of audio engineers, MP3 is fine.
 

loudboy

Tele-Holic
Joined
May 21, 2003
Posts
648
Location
Sedona, Arizona
MP3s are fine and sound good. I do use them for convenience when I email, typically.

I can understand why guys would want to preserve the very highest level of quality for reasons of pride, or because their studio has a lot of really awesome sounding gear and they want the full potential of that realized.

But realistically for anyone who is going to hear it outside of audio engineers, MP3 is fine.

It's not reasons of pride - it's because it's an industry standard, and your work deserves to be preserved as it was created.

Another big reason - mp3 is a "lossy" format. Every time it is changed/edited/etc and re-saved it gets a little bit worse-sounding. Not practical for the many steps a project goes thru, in the course of production.

As a deliverable, for use on phones/iPods/etc, sure. Most people don't care.

Comparable to saving photos in .jpg - the quality degrades every time you save it.
 

Skyhook

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Aug 12, 2014
Posts
1,320
Location
Turku, Finland
I save all stems as WAVs and mix down to a WAV stereo master. Then I render to MP3 for playback because MP3s are compressed and take up very little space, compared to a WAV. The MP3 sound quality is good enough for playback.

This!
I also might have to "master" the .wav a bit before I convert to .mp3.
Also... you can't make a CD-Audio disc from mp3 -files. They have to be .wavs at the time of burning.
 

VintageSG

Friend of Leo's
Silver Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2016
Posts
4,962
Location
Yorkshire
WAV all the way to electronic delivery.
MP3 has a ( deserved ) bad reputation for low bit-rate or poor converters from times past, but realistically, when was the last time you heard pre-echo or artefacting on an MP3 of 256 or 320K? Encoders got good. Bit rates rose. Take advantage of it.

FLAC ( my preference ) or 320KB MP3 for delivery, keeping the WAV master. A FLAC can be turned back to a WAV without any losses for later burning if needed, and MP3 can't.
 

littlebadboy

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Jun 25, 2016
Posts
1,885
Location
Midwest, USA
I am not an expert, but wav just sounds better. It seems that it has more depth to me while mp3 sounds "2 dimensional". I try to make videos for my music once in a while (channel link might be in sig) and I also noticed the difference in using a wav together with the video versus mp3. For sharing and sending to friends, I use mp3 because it's smaller in bytes to send. But for my projects, I have decided to use wav as of recent.
 

Bob Womack

Friend of Leo's
Joined
May 28, 2016
Posts
2,080
Location
Between Clever and Stupid
I do a lot of work for movie and TV scores that also goes to soundtrack albums and digital delivery. Here comes: I export mixes to -24lufs density in .wav 16bit/48k for broadcast and to -12-13lufs 16bit/48k to be mastered for CD, and then convert the -12-13lufs version to .mp3 at 320 for streaming and digital delivery.

Were that not enough, much of the music then gets dubbed to other languages to I am expected to export stems of voices of character voices and instruments in order to aid the process. Those go at -24lufs 16bit/48k. I just put out a dubbing export package with twenty voice stems(!).
It makes exports days interesting enough.
madsmile.gif


Bob
 

GreatDaneRock

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Dec 6, 2018
Posts
1,137
Location
Central FL
MP3s are fine and sound good. I do use them for convenience when I email, typically.

I can understand why guys would want to preserve the very highest level of quality for reasons of pride, or because their studio has a lot of really awesome sounding gear and they want the full potential of that realized.

But realistically for anyone who is going to hear it outside of audio engineers, MP3 is fine.

Are you being serious? Any and all paying clients that hires recording, mixing, editing, or mastering services expects the highest quality from your work, as they should,, and that involves delivering lossless wav or aiff files. Period!

It's not reasons of pride - it's because it's an industry standard, and your work deserves to be preserved as it was created.

Another big reason - mp3 is a "lossy" format. Every time it is changed/edited/etc and re-saved it gets a little bit worse-sounding. Not practical for the many steps a project goes thru, in the course of production.

As a deliverable, for use on phones/iPods/etc, sure. Most people don't care.

Comparable to saving photos in .jpg - the quality degrades every time you save it.

Thank you, mp3, m4a, and AAC are all lossy encoding formats. They're great to use for your clients to evaluate how your mixes are coming along, as long as you use the highest encoding bit rate, 320 kbps, they're also very convenient for quick distribution via email or other delivery method system. But when it comes to delivering client files, finalizing the work, and making sure it's done at the highest possible quality on your end, you must use a lossless format like wav or aiff.

GDR
 

naveed211

Friend of Leo's
Joined
May 16, 2009
Posts
3,780
Location
Iowa
Are you being serious? Any and all paying clients that hires recording, mixing, editing, or mastering services expects the highest quality from your work, as they should,, and that involves delivering wav or aiff files. Period!



Thank you, mp3, m4a, and AAC are all lossy encoding formats. They're great to use for your clients to evaluate how your mixes are coming along, as long as you use the highest encoding bit rate, 320 kbps, they're also very convenient for quick distribution via email or other delivery method system. But when it comes to delivering client files, finalizing the work, and making sure it's done at the highest possible quality on your end, you must use a lossless format like wav or aiff.

GDR

Sorry, missed the point of the thread. I’m aware that if you have paying clients and are looking for industry standard then WAV is the way to go.
 

klasaine

Poster Extraordinaire
Silver Supporter
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Posts
9,759
Location
Los Angeles, Ca
Ditto.
If I'm delivering tracks - .wav
Just for myself or reference, soundcloud, soundclick, etc. - mp3 @ 320kbps

*Besides sound quality, a big reason why you don't want to deliver something 'pro' in an mp3 (even a 320 mp3) is that mp3s are prone to adding micro seconds on to the beginning and end of a track. That will obviously be problematic when importing one's tracks into someone else's session.
 

FortyEight

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Jul 1, 2020
Posts
1,670
Age
50
Location
Southeastern Wisconsin
MP3s are fine and sound good. I do use them for convenience when I email, typically.

I can understand why guys would want to preserve the very highest level of quality for reasons of pride, or because their studio has a lot of really awesome sounding gear and they want the full potential of that realized.

But realistically for anyone who is going to hear it outside of audio engineers, MP3 is fine.

Pride? Hmmmmm... I feel like it's just not as enjoyable to listen to. To me it sounds more distorted. So far I've had the ability to do everything in wavs so I don't see the issue. But now working with @mexicanyella, we have not been able to figure out how to be able to do wavs on his end. His email wont let him plus apparently his internet stinks. So he's sending us mp3s. Which I think is gonna work fine but in all honesty I'm sort if interested to hear the differences if he put his tracks on a flash drive and sent it to me. :) I may eat my words.

I'm assuming if he sends me MP3's and I'm adding them to my mixes, and then I render to wav, the MP3 is not going to continue to be lossy.... Since my guess is it's converted to wav at that point cuz it's part of the song.

I know I know, I'm a bit slow when it comes to all this technology stuff.
 

schmee

Doctor of Teleocity
Silver Supporter
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Posts
18,084
Location
northwest
WAV in my experience is higher quality. Sometimes MP3 can be terrible, sometimes pretty good. I'm just a layman at this stuff though, or more of a hacker!
 

mexicanyella

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Posts
3,763
Location
Troy, MO
Mexicanyella here...since I’m recording using the BandLab mobile app and an iPhone at the moment, I’m working with .m4a files as the source material.

Does anyone have any insight into how well that format’s lossy data compression sounds compared to high-rate .mp3 files?
 

stratology

Tele-Meister
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Posts
285
Location
Ireland
Both.

For evaluating mixes, 24bit/44k wav or aiff.

For emailing to people, mp3.

For uploads to places like Dropbox wav or aiff - if you have a shared file, and someone listens to it on Dropbox, Dropbox will always compress the file to mp3. So if you upload an mp3, it will be compressed twice, and sound like crap.




Filetypes:

Wav, Aiff are lossless, full quality audio files.
mp3, m4a are file compressed, lossy audio files - lower quality than wav
FLAC, ALAC are files that use lossless file compression - like zip - full quality, smaller file size.
 

FortyEight

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Jul 1, 2020
Posts
1,670
Age
50
Location
Southeastern Wisconsin
Mexicanyella here...since I’m recording using the BandLab mobile app and an iPhone at the moment, I’m working with .m4a files as the source material.

Does anyone have any insight into how well that format’s lossy data compression sounds compared to high-rate .mp3 files?

Was the M4a file the one I couldn't drop into reaper? Maybe I should ask on the reaper forums about that specifically... How to do it.. If it's possible. Is it better than MP3?
 




Top