| Author |
Message |
mosc
Site Admin

Joined: Jan 31, 2003 Posts: 18294 Location: Durham, NC
Audio files: 235
G2 patch files: 60
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:28 am Post subject:
|
 |
|
One of the first things mp3 encoders do is reduce stereo information. If there is bass in the file, that is the first place the stereo is reduced. So, if your recordings have stereo bass content, it can have an unwanted side effect of bass reduction. _________________ --Howard
my music and other stuff |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
emdot_ambient
Joined: Nov 22, 2009 Posts: 667 Location: Frederick, MD
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:46 pm Post subject:
|
 |
|
| mosc wrote: | | One of the first things mp3 encoders do is reduce stereo information. If there is bass in the file, that is the first place the stereo is reduced. So, if your recordings have stereo bass content, it can have an unwanted side effect of bass reduction. |
Great point.
It's also interesting to note that lower tones are less directional than higher tones...more of those frequencies are felt rather than heard...so it's less important to place the bass somewhere other than near-center in the stereo field. Consequently if you're mixing/mastering a track that you're ultimately going to be encoding to MP3, you might as well put the bass mainly in the center of the stereo field, thus minimizing its loss post-encoding. _________________ Looking for a certain ratio since 1978 |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
emdot_ambient
Joined: Nov 22, 2009 Posts: 667 Location: Frederick, MD
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 3:52 pm Post subject:
|
 |
|
And as a side note...the major labels have announced that they're going to stop producing music CDs by the end of 2012 (except for limited edition runs by specific artists), opting instead for downloads only.
I find it fascinating that society at large has collectively decided that portability, accesibility and speed of downloading is more important that sound quality. When CDs first came out, sound quality was a major selling point (disputed though that claim has become). Holds more music, less distortion, wider frequency range, less prone to audio degredation due to repeated plays.
Now it's like, F-- that, gimme lossy digital files!
I wonder what that says about our culture (and whether it will spur the continued comeback of vinyl). _________________ Looking for a certain ratio since 1978 |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
mosc
Site Admin

Joined: Jan 31, 2003 Posts: 18294 Location: Durham, NC
Audio files: 235
G2 patch files: 60
|
Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2011 4:58 pm Post subject:
|
 |
|
I once worked on HDTV back in the early 90s. The techies were working on making the picture beautiful. There was a huge international poll taken about HDTV in 1990. The result was that when people asked what they would like in next generation TV, the VAST majority said: better programs. No one was interested in better quality pictures.
The irony is, even though the new TVs can produce better pictures, virtually all delivery mechanisms (cable, broadcast, etc.) use just awful compression resulting in really shitty pictures, and the programs are still shitty.
 _________________ --Howard
my music and other stuff |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
emdot_ambient
Joined: Nov 22, 2009 Posts: 667 Location: Frederick, MD
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
pyrosonic

Joined: Jul 12, 2008 Posts: 383 Location: Kent,Oh. USA
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
audiodef

Joined: Sep 05, 2011 Posts: 749 Location: LFO1
Audio files: 63
|
Posted: Wed Nov 16, 2011 1:35 pm Post subject:
|
 |
|
| mosc wrote: | No one was interested in better quality pictures.
|
I voted for better picture!  |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
|