|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 18,854
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 18,854 |
Bud,
That was a really interesting exercise!
It turns out that, for the most part, I can't hear the difference between a 320 kbps mp3 and a wav. When I listened to the samples, the best that I could do was to narrow it down to the two best sounding ones. Then I couldn't choose between those two. The final decision was nothing more than a coin toss. Interestingly, out of the 6 times, I only chose wav once and the rest were 320 kbps mp3s.
That doesn't surprise me because I already know that I can't hear too much above around 13,000 Hz. I also know that one of the ways to increase overall mp3 quality is to filter out the high frequencies so that data bits are not needlessly used up in recording information that many people won't even hear. If my understanding is correct, this would mean that a 320 kbps mp3 that has been set to compress only those frequencies less than (say) 15,000Hz will probably sound the same to me as a wav since the bits of data in the mp3 have been used to maximise storing my 'listenable' frequencies of music.
Thanks for sharing the link.
Noel
MY SONGS...Audiophile BIAB 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 11,379
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 11,379 |
Guys I am one step short of deaf. I have hearing aids, but I lost one at the barber shop so I only ware one in my right ear. When I mix, its a mess since I can't hear a broad range of frequencies... but I got 4 out of six right for the uncompressed wave.  I can hear it. It is cleaner and clearer.
Dan, BIAB2024, SoundCloud Win11, i7(12thGen), 32GB, 1TB SSD(M.2 NVMe SSD), 2TB Libraries, 1 TB(WD-Black), 2TB SSD(M.2 NVMe SSD)Data, Motu Audio Express, Keystation 61, SL88 Studio, Reaper
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,048
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,048 |
I have zip hearing above 8k. And a severe loss from 2k on. Beyond 8k mixing for me is a visual exercise. Thank you Izotope!
Bud
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,574
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,574 |
3 out of 6. I'm gradually losing high frequencies - probably genetic.
Windows 10 Home 20H2 Build 19042.487
BIAB 2021 (Build 818)
Intel(R) Core(TM), i3-4160, CPU @3.60 GHz RAM 16 GB, 64 Bit X64-based processor
Zoom UAC-2 (USB 3 interface-built in midi)
VoiceLive 3 Extreme, Sputnik Valve Condenser Mic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 2,902
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 2,902 |
I have zip hearing above 8k. And a severe loss from 2k on. Beyond 8k mixing for me is a visual exercise. Thank you Izotope!
Bud
. This is funny! I recently submitted something for a songtradr opportunity that made final selection that I didn’t even listen to! I was in a public place and had forgotten to bring my headphones! It just “looked” right. Lol!
LyricLab A.I assisted chords and lyric app. Export lyrics and import directly into Band-in-a-Box 2024. https://lyriclab.net Play-along with songs you know and love, download SGU files https://playiit.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,414
PG Music Staff
|
|
PG Music Staff
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,414 |
This is a really neat exercise! I managed to pull a 5/6, getting Coldplay wrong. I still swear the claimed high quality audio sounds a bit muddy, but maybe that's just how it was mixed - or my headphones need replaced. Or my ears :P.
Thanks for sharing !
Cheers,
Deryk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 20,752
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 20,752 |
At 72 years young I picked 1 wav file while all the rest were 320 MP3s. After playing in bands for years, many standing next to a Leslie, I think that is pretty good.
Me, it's not about how many times you fail, it's about how many times you get back up.
Cop, that's not how field sobriety tests work.
64 bit Win 10 Pro, the latest BiaB/RB, Roland Octa-Capture audio interface, a ton of software/hardware
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,272
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,272 |
I tend to be a very methodical person. The first time, I took the test I got 3 wav, 2@320, and 1@128. The next time, I did not. What I got would be irrelevant to the fact that I got a different answer. The third time, again, a different answer. In all honesty, for the most part, it felt like I was guessing. I was trying, and felt I was hearing various things...but then felt like a "shot in the dark." So, I can't hear quality that well. lol That was what I suspected.  Thanks Bud!
Chad (Hope that makes it easier)
TEMPO TANTRUM: What a lead singer has when they can't stay in time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,063
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,063 |
That was fun! I did it once last night. Got the first four and missed the last two. I was confident in the first three, four was a little tougher but I could hear the difference and the last two I felt like I was guessing. I was really pleased with that since I was listening through cheap $4 mini headphones on my little android tablet in the living room while my husband was watching TV and the noisy a/c in there was on. I was like alright! Maybe the secret is cheap headphones. I've had mild high freq hearing loss in my right ear since a blow to the side of my head when I was a kid. What bothers me most is when tinnitus flares up in that ear. It's really obnoxious noise to mix through. It's been so bad at times that I seriously thought about quitting music. After lots of googling, I discovered quite a few suffer from it and continue making their music by learning to work around it. So I've learned to get ear rest among other things. At times it's still hard to deal with if I have a nasty flare. It's like the more you focus on it the worse it gets and ignoring it isn't easy. I have to encourage myself to keep on keeping on. And discipline myself to take breaks when I'm mixing something and my ears are tired - easier said that done. The good days are great when it's not there or so low I don't notice it. The bad days suck. I'm still hanging in there. Maybe someday I'll figure out how to do it by sight.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,987
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,987 |
I've spent too many years in high ambient noise jobs (paper mill and construction) and refused to wear hearing protection so I have lost most of my high-end hearing. When working with audio, I EQ to compensate. I often rely on BIAB's default settings and they have been very good. If I want to pull the soloist or particular instrument out front more, I just guess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,113
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,113 |
Well, I was feeling quite discouraged when I first took the test, I wasn't hearing much difference whatsoever!
I'm in my mid 60s so some high end loss due to age, plus I played in a band for many years which didn't help.
Then I read the post from Josie so instead of listening through my studio headphones I listened through a really cheap set of phones and could get most of them. I think maybe because the cheap set really brings out the high end where the mp3 artifacts live?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
Bud,
That was a really interesting exercise!
It turns out that, for the most part, I can't hear the difference between a 320 kbps mp3 and a wav. When I listened to the samples, the best that I could do was to narrow it down to the two best sounding ones. Then I couldn't choose between those two. The final decision was nothing more than a coin toss. Interestingly, out of the 6 times, I only chose wav once and the rest were 320 kbps mp3s.
That doesn't surprise me because I already know that I can't hear too much above around 13,000 Hz. I also know that one of the ways to increase overall mp3 quality is to filter out the high frequencies so that data bits are not needlessly used up in recording information that many people won't even hear. If my understanding is correct, this would mean that a 320 kbps mp3 that has been set to compress only those frequencies less than (say) 15,000Hz will probably sound the same to me as a wav since the bits of data in the mp3 have been used to maximise storing my 'listenable' frequencies of music.
Thanks for sharing the link.
Noel
Noel, can you post a link about this? I don't know if most mp3 codecs are smart enough to neclect coding data above 15kHz.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2017
Posts: 2,945
PG Music Staff
|
PG Music Staff
Joined: Jun 2017
Posts: 2,945 |
I got 4/6. I felt the one that was the hardest was the acapella one. It was easier for me to identify the ones that had a busier sound to the song.
Cheers,
Ember
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,627
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,627 |
I seem to recall a brick ceiling for MP3 at 16k .. let me do some digging. Be right back That brick ceiling seems to have been at the 128-192k conversion rates. 320 gets a bit higher. https://thesession.org/discussions/19642
Last edited by rharv; 07/10/18 01:36 PM.
Make your sound your own!
.. I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,687
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,687 |
Funny how we're all different Ember. It was exactly the opposite for me. I couldn't hear any difference at all with Neil Young and Coldplay. The 128K Mp3 sounded just as good as the wav to me. But then I got the girl singer, Katy Perry, Jay Z and the classical piano one because they're cleaner, simpler mixes. I was listening for overall presence not specific freq's. The ones I got were obvious to me. I played these through my fairly high end stereo system with a pair of Altec Model 14's, not cans. I never mix with cans I only use them as a test later.
What this really shows is unless you're all set up in a good listening room, no distractions and using good equipment you would never hear any difference at all. This required silence and concentration and who really listens that way? Unless I'm playing mixing engineer I don't listen critically, I'm listening for relaxation and enjoyment and I'm actually surprised that I would be perfectly happy with the 128K Mp3's for that.
It's millennials who could really tell the differences if they actually cared. Sadly I doubt many would. Back in my day me and all my friends were all into high end and expensive stereo equipment. We could tell the differences between turntable cartridges, mid range speakers and high end ones, running tape at 15ips vs 7.5 and all that stuff.
Bob
Biab/RB latest build, Win 11 Pro, Ryzen 5 5600 G, 512 Gig SSD, 16 Gigs Ram, Steinberg UR22 MkII, Roland Sonic Cell, Kurzweil PC3, Hammond SK1, Korg PA3XPro, Garritan JABB, Hypercanvas, Sampletank 3, more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,428
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,428 |
What this really shows is unless you're all set up in a good listening room, no distractions and using good equipment you would never hear any difference at all. This required silence and concentration and who really listens that way? Unless I'm playing mixing engineer I don't listen critically, I'm listening for relaxation and enjoyment and I'm actually surprised that I would be perfectly happy with the 128K Mp3's for that.
It's millennials who could really tell the differences if they actually cared. Sadly I doubt many would. Back in my day me and all my friends were all into high end and expensive stereo equipment. We could tell the differences between turntable cartridges, mid range speakers and high end ones, running tape at 15ips vs 7.5 and all that stuff.
Bob
Bob, I pretty much agree with you on this. For the most part, to the degree possible for each person, musicians have trained ears - generally know what to listen for. Most audience members do not and really don't care. They just want you to play their favorite song - technical stuff totally irrelevant. And yes, about the listening and recording gear back in the '70s, into the early '80s. There was always the discussion of what was better: Sansui, Pioneer, Fischer, etc. I had a complete Marantz system - 7 or 8 pieces. Even had a nice Gerard turntable at one point. Alan
BIAB 2024 Ultra Plus-all StylePaks*Win11*16GB DDR5*Rhyzen 9745x*AT 2035 Mic*Peavey Nashville 112 Amp*Ibanez ART120* Acoustic/Electric/Washburn D200S Acoustic*Stromberg Monterey Jazz Guitar Loops: https://aldavidmusic.wixsite.com/bestmusicloops
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 7,725
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 7,725 |
Hmmmmm. Not so sure this test is all that valid since the samples are streaming.
It should say "how well can you tell audio quality once it has been crapped out by streaming."
I can say that in a non streaming format I can tell a huge difference between a .wav and an MP3 and a large difference between a 256K MP3 once it has been posted to soundcloud and a 320K MP3.
Once a 256k has been posted to soundcloud it sounds "watery" to me. A 320K is better but still leaves a lot to be desired, but again, that is when it is streaming, not so much if it is playing off your computer or another medium.
For some reason I cannot stand .wmv files and am in the process of re-ripping a whole bunch of CDS I accidentally ripped as wmvs a while back. I can't stand to listen to them. I find them quite worthless as a matter of fact, and I am not sure why. They just don't sound right to me. Very thin.
I got most of these right, but again, I don't think "testing" audio quality from a streaming application makes a whole lot of sense.
It's like saying:
Lick these two apples wrapped in cellophane and tin foil and tell me which one is rotten.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,048
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,048 |
Sure they are “streaming.” But they are being buffered so that they can play at a given quality w/o being downloaded. Note that the wav file takes longer to buffer and begin playing as one would expect from a larger file. And that’s a way to cheat on the test by noting that difference! I would not think NPR engineers would add any compression nor would your computer. You should be playing them exactly as if you downloaded them. FWIW!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 7,725
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 7,725 |
Ummmmm, I am not so sure man. I don't know the exact science of it dude, but the .wav files I hear when I play them on my computer or home audio do not sound anything at all remotely like the .wav files I hear streaming from NPR in this scenario. They are 1000 times richer and more dynamic. I have no idea why but they just are. The important part for me is not what I hear on an NPR site "test"--it is what I hear in my own studio, and I know for a fact that I would not even think about posting a 128K MP3 anywhere because even here it sounds horrible, and once it is streaming it is not listenable. Learned that immediately. Anyway, not worth a rumpus of any sort, just doesn't sound remotely like anything but a streaming watered down file to me, all of them. I know what I hear is all. But I think everybody should just listen to what they want to listen to with the ears they have and say whatever they want to say because all of this is so subjective--in the end, there is no real absolute truth in this zone, just perceptions and opinions. Moving right along!! Peace and joy to all ears!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,113
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,113 |
Once a 256k has been posted to soundcloud it sounds "watery" to me. A 320K is better but still leaves a lot to be desired, but again, that is when it is streaming, not so much if it is playing off your computer or another medium.
David, to get the best quality sound from soundcloud you should upload WAV files. Soundcloud automatically encodes anything you upload to (I think) 128K MP3 for streaming playback, so if you upload an MP3 it will get encoded twice. From article https://help.soundcloud.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003452847" Please be aware that we transcode all tracks to various codecs which are optimised for streaming playback. We recommend uploading uncompressed or lossless audio files to ensure this process results in the best possible quality."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,048
Veteran
|
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 14,048 |
Yep. We’ve never uploaded anything but wav’s to SC from the get go. Double compression is artifact heaven.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Topic
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 7,725
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 7,725 |
Thanks guys. Good advice on soundcloud. I found out many things there by trial and error before I read the instruction manual. Hey, I'm a guy.
My original point was about stuff I found out years ago when I was even more ignorant than I am now. That is, in sum:
A.) There is a massive difference between a 128k MP3 and a 320k MP3 whether you upload them or not.
B.) If you upload a 128k it will sound horrible.
C.) Yes you should upload .wavs when you can. Know that now.
D.) I am not at all convinced that a streaming anything will sound as good as the original, or something that is downloaded. Streaming stuff always sounds weak and watery to me. Always, in all circumstances. It just does. But it may just be me, and there may be something really wrong with my head, and myself in general, but that is what I hear. Streaming does not sound as good as downloaded or an original file to me, ever.
Peace out gents. Gotta go feed the machine and pay the mortgage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Update Your PowerTracks Pro Audio 2024 Today!
The Newest RealBand 2024 Update is Here!
The newest RealBand 2024 Build 5 update is now available!
Download and install this to your RealBand 2024 for updated print options, streamlined loading and saving of .SGU & MGU (BB) files, and to add a number of program adjustments that address user-reported bugs and concerns.
This free update is available to all RealBand 2024 users. To learn more about this update and download it, head to www.pgmusic.com/support.realband.htm#20245
The Band-in-a-Box® Flash Drive Backup Option
Today (April 5) is National Flash Drive Day!
Did you know... not only can you download your Band-in-a-Box® Pro, MegaPAK, or PlusPAK purchase - you can also choose to add a flash drive backup copy with the installation files for only $15? It even comes with a Band-in-a-Box® keychain!
For the larger Band-in-a-Box® packages (UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, Audiophile Edition), the hard drive backup copy is available for only $25. This will include a preinstalled and ready to use program, along with your installation files.
Backup copies are offered during the checkout process on our website.
Already purchased your e-delivery version, and now you wish you had a backup copy? It's not too late! If your purchase was for the current version of Band-in-a-Box®, you can still reach out to our team directly to place your backup copy order!
Note: the Band-in-a-Box® keychain is only included with flash drive backup copies, and cannot be purchased separately.
Handy flash drive tip: Always try plugging in a USB device the wrong way first? If your flash drive (or other USB plug) doesn't have a symbol to indicate which way is up, look for the side with a seam on the metal connector (it only has a line across one side) - that's the side that either faces down or to the left, depending on your port placement.
Update your Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows® Today!
Update your Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows for free with build 1111!
With this update, there's more control when saving images from the Print Preview window, we've added defaults to the MultiPicker for sorting and font size, updated printing options, updated RealTracks and other content, and addressed user-reported issues with the StylePicker, MIDI Soloists, key signature changes, and more!
Learn more about this free update for Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows at www.pgmusic.com/support_windowsupdates.htm#1111
Band-in-a-Box® 2024 Review: 4.75 out of 5 Stars!
If you're looking for a in-depth review of the newest Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows version, you'll definitely find it with Sound-Guy's latest review, Band-in-a-Box® 2024 for Windows Review: Incredible new capabilities to experiment, compose, arrange and mix songs.
A few excerpts:
"The Tracks view is possibly the single most powerful addition in 2024 and opens up a new way to edit and generate accompaniments. Combined with the new MultiPicker Library Window, it makes BIAB nearly perfect as an 'intelligent' composer/arranger program."
"MIDI SuperTracks partial generation showing six variations – each time the section is generated it can be instantly auditioned, re-generated or backed out to a previous generation – and you can do this with any track type. This is MAJOR! This takes musical experimentation and honing an arrangement to a new level, and faster than ever."
"Band in a Box continues to be an expansive musical tool-set for both novice and experienced musicians to experiment, compose, arrange and mix songs, as well as an extensive educational resource. It is huge, with hundreds of functions, more than any one person is likely to ever use. Yet, so is any DAW that I have used. BIAB can do some things that no DAW does, and this year BIAB has more DAW-like functions than ever."
Convenient Ways to Listen to Band-in-a-Box® Songs Created by Program Users!
The User Showcase Forum is an excellent place to share your Band-in-a-Box® songs and listen to songs other program users are creating!
There are other places you can listen to these songs too! Visit our User Showcase page to sort by genre, artist (forum name), song title, and date - each listing will direct you to the forum post for that song.
If you'd rather listen to these songs in one place, head to our Band-in-a-Box® Radio, where you'll have the option to select the genre playlist for your listening pleasure. This page has SoundCloud built in, so it won't redirect you. We've also added the link to the Artists SoundCloud page here, and a link to their forum post.
We hope you find some inspiration from this amazing collection of User Showcase Songs!
Congratulations to the 2023 User Showcase Award Winners!
We've just announced the 2023 User Showcase Award Winners!
There are 45 winners, each receiving a Band-in-a-Box 2024 UltraPAK! Read the official announcement to see if you've won.
Our User Showcase Forum receives more than 50 posts per day, with people sharing their Band-in-a-Box songs and providing feedback for other songs posted.
Thank you to everyone who has contributed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums66
Topics81,565
Posts734,452
Members38,492
| |
Most Online2,537
Jan 19th, 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean