DJing with WAV's or MP3's??

[silveriofunk]

my point was more that i really don't think must people notice the difference... not in a club anyway...

[SubFunk]

that is discussible.

as for the OP, i (my dick) apologised already.

and the question @ chidj was a sarcastic joke.
any good digital label or distro sells wav, and also any decent label sends promos as waves, respectively if you are on their list, they always send you your prefered fileformat, once you ask.

[Ninja-Matic]

@Ninja-Matic,

Point taken. You obviously have your pulse on the music industry. I'm a luddite and you're the hipster. I guess all the labels that send me uncompressed .wav/ aiff files do it out of sympathy cause they worry I can't adapt. It's cool. Play your "am radio tracks" and just do me one favor.


Don't do me any favors.





Peace!

Tod

Again - I'm questioning whether or not you read posts. I never said "all". I said "sometimes that is the ONLY way to get unreleased tracks or tracks that are ONLY released online".

I do get WAVs - but not all the time. I've remixed tracks for a few major labels and only ONCE was I asked to submit the track as a WAV - oddly enough - from a smaller record label, lol.

To top it off - you're losing fidelity just from these big club systems. Low-end frequencies from subwoofers cover up any artifacts quite well. I tested a system in Chicago last year - played 3 versions of the same song - one as WAV direct from WB, that same track as 320 and the same track as 192 mp3. I set up to record the audio during an empty room earlier in the day. There wasn't one difference between the 3 versions no matter which way I analyzed it. They all had the same footprint. On top of that - 256 and greater yields a frequency range over 19khz and 44.1 (up to 48) - where CD quality is only 44.1k samples per second.

Most humans can't hear freqs above 16k - so dynamic range for most people is lower than the recorded playback average of 20-20k.

All things considered - the largest killer of audio fidelity is the sound system you're playing on - at clubs - they are all cranked - most of the time clipping reds and being limited - which squishes audio fidelity right there.

This is why we mix at low volumes - to hear the discrepancies being reproduced by studio monitors - at blasting levels found in 100% of the clubs I've DJ'd at - you're not getting the full, unhinged audio fidelity.

The point? Uncompressed 44.1/16 files are moot when being blasted over huge systems with compression and limiting.

But maybe you're right - maybe I shouldn't do my own research as a producer/engineer and just make rash claims as to how audio works - using no logic or professional research as my toolsets.

Nah - I'll stick with the hard facts rather than making shit up.

Cheers.

[Ninja-Matic]

2) Anyone who DJ's without the use of audio-enhancing plugins, proper compression, limiting, etc should be SHOT - however - this goes without saying.

Deadmau5 walked me through is setup a year ago and gave me a bunch of tricks with plugins, etc while DJing live.

He uses MP3's, too. I take it that means the lot of you basement DJs are better than he is because you bash MP3 as a format.

Cool. I love the internets!

[SubFunk]

^^^ only because XYZ uses XYZ it makes it automatically good or acceptable?

wow

got any own opinion, experience or ears?

[SubFunk]

even if bob katz would claim mp3s are OK, he would loose all respect in my book.

EDIT: and yes i use them myself partly, but i am aware of the fact that it is pretty much the worst of all compressed audio formats, only because they became majorly popular does not make them any good at all.

vhs vs beta in video anyone?

[silveriofunk]

I dunno man, most of the venues are not "listening only", pleople are talking, yelling, dancing, the speakers sometimes are not the best, people are drunk... many many factors

Mind you, i am talking about mp3's at 320.

hyper compressed mp3's will sound bad definitely.

I guess that if someone can notice the difference, it'll bother them

i have never come across a club or venue where i could actually spot what they were using, or maybe all those times i thought the EQ was funny, it could have been that the dj was using hyper compressed stuff..

[SubFunk]

I dunno man, most of the venues are not "listening only", pleople are talking, yelling, dancing, the speakers sometimes are not the best, people are drunk... many many factors

all fair enough and i also said that in most venues (at least here in berlin) you can't tell the difference, the PAs are so rotten bad to start with...

but it is a mediocre format which i think should be avoided whenever possible.

they really do sound hollow in the lower region, especially bad for bass heavy dance stuff on real good soundsystems, that luckily do exist in some clubs the world over, like flex in vienna, or the end (rip) in london, fuse in belgium, soniclab in bratislava (rip) and so on... to name but a few places of sonic heaven!

i totally understand the 'hd space' issue,

that is why i in my case whenever i can take wav / aiff files and convert them at least into 320kbs/48khz AACs or use the full format (when possible) for gigs. also at times 320kbs mp3s (when i don't have it in another format) but in a gig situation on a PA i would never play anything below that... 256 is already a 100% no go.

peace.

[Da hand]

2) Anyone who DJ's without the use of audio-enhancing plugins, proper compression, limiting, etc should be SHOT - however - this goes without saying.

Deadmau5 walked me through is setup a year ago and gave me a bunch of tricks with plugins, etc while DJing live.

He uses MP3's, too. I take it that means the lot of you basement DJs are better than he is because you bash MP3 as a format.

Cool. I love the internets!

Well, if you are using the line "it is correct because x so and so showed me / does it" as your only reply, then it seems like you do not understand the tools yourself very well. And I guess the "basement DJ" comment was an attempt to ruffle our feathers a bit?

If you are using an external mixer - like Deadmau5 does (and like everyone should) - then there is no reason to be using compressors and limiters on the master channel of your software. Compressing and limiting songs that are already compressed and limited very hard will only serve to degrade your sound. And while you may use the compressor and limiter to catch the peaks caused by your effects (to not go beyond 0dbfs), it is far better to leave yourself some headroom on the software's master channel instead and simply raise the volume on your external mixer.

[SubFunk]

If you are using an external mixer - like Deadmau5 does (and like everyone should) - then there is no reason to be using compressors and limiters on the master channel of your software. Compressing and limiting songs that are already compressed and limited very hard will only serve to degrade your sound. And while you may use the compressor and limiter to catch the peaks caused by your effects (to not go beyond 0dbfs), it is far better to leave yourself some headroom on the software's master channel instead and simply raise the volume on your external mixer.

precisely, and if you are lucky and you can play on a real good hardware mixer, like a rodec, urei or formula sound for instance then you can just like on a good old desk run them real, real MF-ing hot to get that beautiful analog saturated sound. but for that you actually have to have a bit of your own knowledge, experience and personal flavour.

[Ninja-Matic]

^^^ only because XYZ uses XYZ it makes it automatically good or acceptable?

wow

got any own opinion, experience or ears?

The idea is to LEARN from others and make your own interpretation. If something WORKS - why not use it? I was under the impression that learning things from others is what makes you smarter. You know, basically why people go to school to LEARN stuff and apply it to their daily lives.

I take it you don't use Ableton since you, more than likely, did not create the program. So is using someone else's DAW "automatically good or acceptable?"

So Mozart sucks because he used an instrument created by someone else? Is Paganini any less of a composer because he plays the violin which he did not invent? I'm pretty sure you use toolsets, plugins, DAWs, instruments, etc which YOU did not personally create.

Did you even think before you posted or are you just randomly making comments to purposely be hypocritical?

[Ninja-Matic]

Well, if you are using the line "it is correct because x so and so showed me / does it" as your only reply, then it seems like you do not understand the tools yourself very well. And I guess the "basement DJ" comment was an attempt to ruffle our feathers a bit?

If you are using an external mixer - like Deadmau5 does (and like everyone should) - then there is no reason to be using compressors and limiters on the master channel of your software. Compressing and limiting songs that are already compressed and limited very hard will only serve to degrade your sound. And while you may use the compressor and limiter to catch the peaks caused by your effects (to not go beyond 0dbfs), it is far better to leave yourself some headroom on the software's master channel instead and simply raise the volume on your external mixer.

Everyone learns what they learn by research or being taught by someone else. Research can simply mean trial and error. There are basic rules to adhere to when considering audio fidelity and dynamic range.

Oh but there ARE reasons to use compressors and limiters - I compose my sets live on stage - also - you need to consider that not every song is mastered for every sound system at every club you play in - this is why we do something called "sound checks" before shows. So you can get peak performance and fidelity based on the setup of the particular venue you decide to play at.

I was always under the impression that headroom is perfectly acceptable. This is not news to me.

Most venues I play at will have some type of sound engineer on hand and my feed is usually well below 0db - the compression and limiting are left to the venue's engineer.

It is different everywhere I go - but as stated - there are ways to enhance the audio to give it a smoother polish depending on the venue and their sound system. "PLUG AND PLAY" has never been my way to go.

I do break down and master individual instruments/percussion ahead of time to limit CPU usage during live shows - but there is a mild bit of processing still done with plugins that emulate the more CPU-intensive Waves that I use in my home studio.

What REALLY sucks - is that simply moving from studio to real-world sound systems - you're losing a LOT of fidelity right there. A lot of the hard work that goes into perfecting every track is lost during the transition from studio to car stereo, club, home systems, etc. None of those systems are designed to reproduce audio like proper studio monitors.

Simply bouncing to 44.1/16 is a major hit in fidelity.

If there is a way to help increase the overall quality during live performances - then I'll use it - whether I found a trick myself or was taught a trick by someone else.

The funny thing is - you're all giving your own ideas on what YOU think others should do - but then saying that just because XYZ works for someone else means you suck because you have no brain of your own.

Irony != awesomeness.

[Da hand]

I believe that the MP3 format is not going to last very long anymore as the main audio format. Certainly not for DJs. Its usefulness is starting to run out - with faster internet connections (and all reputable stores selling FLAC and Wavs) and bigger hard drives.

When you think about it, how many songs do you really need to have with you at a gig? Do you really need to have your whole music collection with you (from classical music, through funk, acid jazz, techno, hip hop, whatever....) when you know you will play a 2 hour techno set? Wouldn't 1000 techno/house songs more than suffice? And I mean the ones that have potential to be played in your set. That would be like 10 record bags of vinyl!

In digital terms, let us say each song is 10 minutes long and in WAV format - that only equals to 110 Gigs. Any hard drive you get these days has way more space.

For those that claim they have no space to carry WAVs, I think it is more just laziness in not making gig specific collections that you bring with you and update / sort / clean up like you would with a record box of vinyl.

[SubFunk]

what has learning from someone to do with your general statement it is good because XYZ uses it?

i like to know.

(at least that is what i read in your deadmau5 response, the proof that it is good because... and others are wrong because deadmau5 does it, and what he does is correct, correct me if misinterpreted it)

also, by the way what are talking about tools... here?

we are talking about wether it is OK to play mp3s in venues with good sounding PAs vs full audi files, at least we drifted that way from the original topic. (which topic titel is confusing and actually means what we discuss now)

and yes we all learn form others, but we also should form our own opinions.

and mine is that mp3s are pretty much the worst of all compressed audio formats available and that they are not justified by the fact they are the most popular ones around. and i stay to my opinion that they should if possible be avoided, there are so many better compressed file formats to choose from that sound simply much better, such as AACs in high conversion rates, for example.

peace.

[SubFunk]

I believe that the MP3 format is not going to last very long anymore as the main audio format. Certainly not for DJs. Its usefulness is starting to run out - with faster internet connections (and all reputable stores selling FLAC and Wavs) and bigger hard drives.

When you think about it, how many songs do you really need to have with you at a gig? Do you really need to have your whole music collection with you (from classical music, through funk, acid jazz, techno, hip hop, whatever....) when you know you will play a 2 hour techno set? Wouldn't 1000 techno/house songs more than suffice? And I mean the ones that have potential to be played in your set. That would be like 10 record bags of vinyl!

In digital terms, let us say each song is 10 minutes long and in WAV format - that only equals to 110 Gigs. Any hard drive you get these days has way more space.

For those that claim they have no space to carry WAVs, I think it is more just laziness in not making gig specific collections that you bring with you and update / sort / clean up like you would with a record box of vinyl.

+1

good points