It's a shame HD-AAC isn't used more for this type of thing. If you are using the audio for track sampling and comping / sound design etc, just be aware there is some noise in there, each track you have which is MP3 based will add noise (purely a by-product of the MP3). Quality at the Youtube stage is also subjective because you don't know how many passes the process has gone through in the first place. going back to the Youtube>MP3 thing, if possible record the Youtube clip to WAV directly instead of converting to MP3 to retain as much quality as possible. WAV to WAV recording doesn't have this issue (unless you're doing different bit depth or sample rate). This is why WAVs / AIFs are best because really they are like ADAT (perfect reconstruction input and output). MP3 rendering to MP3 is basically the same effect (just digital method of 'tape-to-tape'). Our analogy was that the MP3 is technically a 'digital cassette tape', where first pass you'll get a little tape hiss due to the medium plus the rest of the content, then copy that tape to another you'll end up with the master tape being clean and second tape being subject to more 'hiss', third pass (recoridng tape 2) gets noisy again. One of our friends (Miss Represent, UK DnB dj) brought this subject up of MP3 mixes and rendering to Wav or to MP3 - she found that the rendered MP3 mix sounded worse that the WAV would, purely down to the double file compression.
If you're doing just the one pass then fine but if you plan on using in a mix for some reason as is and then bounce down to WAV then MP3, you're constantly degrading the signal and raising noise level due to the compression algorithm in the MP3 codecs. Why? because surprisingly if you rip a compressed format (think Youtube included) such as a Youtube MP4 to MP3 conversion, you're actually degrading the MP3 from the off. record to WAV directly via loopback software.
0 kommentar(er)
