 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (2)dariusgriffin big ...and 395 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614104 Today 1 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
What's the minimum quality MP3 you'd use for laptop DJing in a nightclub? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Depends on the soundsystem. If the mixer bleeds every time you touch it and the speakers are wrecked, it'll be hard to notice much difference between 192 and 320. Also, bear in mind they're often mono, I suppose it'd be better to have a mono 256kbps file to a stereo 128kbps file. Also depends on the clientele; if it's just a load of kids partying rather than discerning chin-stroking musos, sound quality isn't that important. I've used 128kbps mp3s burnt to CD several times without anyone commenting on the quality/really noticing it. I once even did a whole set off 2 CDs burnt from mp3s and people loved it, one of the best responses I've ever had. :) All that said, I'd normally try to use at least 192kbps. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the guy at the bar here (who has some dodgy duel-ipod dock crossfader thing) seems to play stuff at 64kbps. you can notice the shite-ness, but it is bearable. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Jeez 92kbps is bad, but 64kbps really does start to sound a bit underwater. I'd imagine anyone even remotely interested in music (which, if they're in a nightclub, you'd hope they'd be) would not only be able to tell, but would find it almost painful to listen to. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think people will be inclined to think the soundsystem is shit and kind of trust you as a DJ. the fools! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I spose its OK if its sound recordings of bell chimes or something. For anything else..... no. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
128 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
according to lame: "--preset standard" This preset should generally be transparent to most people on most music and is already quite high in quality." I think it's better to use one of those presets than a constant bitrate unless you absolutely need a constant bitrate for some reason. constant bitrate=more fluctuating quality because certain sections need more/less bits than others to sound like the original |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Eh? Constant bitrate = constant quality or so i was always told? I'm trying to puzzle out what you mean... certain sections get approximated in VBR files, pure silence is reproduced at something like 32kbps i think. I suppose for DJing it depends on yer audience but anything with deep bass sounds a bit... off... at less than 320, at least on a proper system (apparently you can cut dubplates from 320s without anyone being able to tell, sayeth the clever men at transition mastering). I dunno if plastician plays digital-only sets now but the last time i saw him, all the vinyl-based geezers sounded much heavier, more punch and warmth. Not exactly definitive but it made me wonder. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"Eh? Constant bitrate = constant quality or so i was always told? I'm trying to puzzle out what you mean..." no quantization = destruction factor of mp3+lots of other compressors, this defines quality VBR = (more)constant quantization = (more)constant quality CBR = variable quantization = variable quality the difference is more easily seen in (highly) compressed video |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yes, laserbeak is right. the idea is, that the bitrate needs to be variable to keep the quality constant. more complex sections need more bits to reach a certain quality, so in order to maitain quality you need vbr. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The question of constant versus variable is ultimately one of space (and if space isn't a concern, why not just use constant 320 all the time, or even flac or wav?). A 256 vbr file can be smaller in size than a constant rate 192 one and overall, the sound quality will generally be better. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
There's a bar in Liverpool that seems to play really low-bitrate MP3s all the time, the hi-hats and cymbals sound all flanged and weird and the eq is fucked. Probably 91kbs at the max. I can't understand why you'd think that sounded okay. :\ |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
