Which way to bounce?

[slimcharm]

Ok..after spending almost an hour on hold. I finally got a person in tech support and he walked me through the issue with my MP3 option..so it works.

Now my question is...when is it best to bounce to a .wav file vs. MP3 file or quicktime...? How do I know which is the best choice?

[richiebee]

Can you re-phrase the quesion? I don't understand what you're asking.


Rich

[slimcharm]

After I have recorded vocals in Protools..and saved them. Do I send them from the saved audio file..Or do I need to bounce them to send them? After thinking about this ..maybe the bouncing is just for when I want to combine the vocals with the instrumentals..So my first question is
1. When do I use bouncing?

2. When should I be saving files as .wav. or mp3 or quicktime?

Thanks...
Lee

[richiebee]

Okay, I get it now.

Well, you bounce down to get a stereo mixed file that you can put on your CD. The source ProTools wav files will be your backing or your vocal track or whatever... bouncing mixes them.

I don't know how the MP3 plugin works... does it allow you to bounce down to MP3? Or is it a separate function altogether? When you convert probably depends on where the plugin works.

Personally, even if I had this option in ProTools (sorry, but I don't think you should have to pay for this particular option) I would prefer to bounce down to an uncompressed stereo file and then convert that stereo file to MP3. That way I have the same audio in uncompressed format. You can bounce again from your original ProTools session so its not a big deal, but the way I'd prefer to work.

The question of whether you get better quality from bouncing down an MP3 as opposed to converting a bounced WAV is moot really since MP3 format is compressed and significantly compromised in terms of quality at the best of times.



R.

[slimcharm]

Yeah..what a racket..after you buy it (that is once you figure out you dont have it) ..they sell it by saying not everyone wants it and it would add $20 to the price..however Sony acid comes with it and its cheap.

Anyway so MP3 comprimises quality..what about quicktime?

[richiebee]

Originally Posted by slimcharm

Yeah..what a racket..after you buy it (that is once you figure out you dont have it) ..they sell it by saying not everyone wants it and it would add $20 to the price..however Sony acid comes with it and its cheap.

Be very cautious of Digidesign... they try and sell EVERYTHING. If you get deeper into the industry, you may find users wanting your source as OMF files... whereas most sequencer/multitrack recording software includes this option, Digi decides its worth an extra $500! They rip you off, no doubt about it. Be very wary of upgrades too... only buy them if you need them, because you'll be damn sure buying one will require that you buy something else ot make it compatible!!!

Anyway so MP3 comprimises quality..what about quicktime?

All compressed formats compromise quality. If they didn't, noone would use uncompressed formats.

I would use MP3 over Quicktime. Out of choice, I'd use OGG over both, but it's not really a widely accepted format.

If you have to compress (for the internet), use high bit rate MP3 (160kbps is pretty good... higher is better). It's compatible, and pretty good. If you don't have to compress (if you're putting on CD), don't compress.

If you're sending file to someone else for mixing, try and send uncompressed on CD. If you're sending over the internet for casual/convenience listening, use MP3.

Rich

[slimcharm]

The person who is mixing..says he needs .wav files. So how do you send a .wav file ?
So far I have sent THROUGH a site on the internet..where it takes about 5 minutes. But when I try to send through my email it doesn work. Suggestions?

You are very right on digidesigns. For example part of my headache has been being sent OLD software with my NEW mbox2 (till they run out) So I had to download the latest software, the helpfile ...and wait on hold forever to figure out what to do with the MP3 option. I asked them for a free copy of the latest software (since I just recently purchased the box) and they wanted $15! OUTRAGEOUS!
On the plus side..my box had a coupon for a free year of a high membership at a certain hosting site. Its turn key and after all the hassles I have had with learning to record. I am going to use it to build her website.
I had to pay for an upgrade but still saved alot..but that is another issue.

So for quality .wav is best..MP3 next and finally quicktime?

Thanks! Please let me know best way to send .wav file.

[richiebee]

Originally Posted by slimcharm

The person who is mixing..says he needs .wav files. So how do you send a .wav file ?
So far I have sent THROUGH a site on the internet..where it takes about 5 minutes. But when I try to send through my email it doesn work. Suggestions?

You are very right on digidesigns. For example part of my headache has been being sent OLD software with my NEW mbox2 (till they run out) So I had to download the latest software, the helpfile ...and wait on hold forever to figure out what to do with the MP3 option. I asked them for a free copy of the latest software (since I just recently purchased the box) and they wanted $15! OUTRAGEOUS!
On the plus side..my box had a coupon for a free year of a high membership at a certain hosting site. Its turn key and after all the hassles I have had with learning to record. I am going to use it to build her website.
I had to pay for an upgrade but still saved alot..but that is another issue.

So for quality .wav is best..MP3 next and finally quicktime?

Thanks! Please let me know best way to send .wav file.

WAV's are big. Not many e-mail hosts will allow you to handle files that big. Going through a web site that gives you enough web space and bandwidth may be the best way... if you have a gmail account, you MAY be able to email it through that... I'm not really sure. The professionals usually FTP it direct I'd say. It's the quickest way. Whoever is mixing should be able to help you there... if they can't, then use the web site space idea.

I don't know how good Quicktime compression is. I don't know anyone who uses it for audio. It's pretty standard for video.

I'm surprised they wanted to charge you for a software upgrade this soon - digi usually gives you two upgrades free I think (I still wouldn't advise getting them unless there are clear advantages, and no need for upgrading plugins as a result). Seems they're ripping you off if they're not giving you ANY free upgrade. Were they charging you for the upgrade (downloadable) or for a CD version of the free upgrade? If they were charging for the upgrade itself, you should complain.

[Geisler]

Originally Posted by richiebee

All compressed formats compromise quality. If they didn't, noone would use uncompressed formats.

I would use MP3 over Quicktime. Out of choice, I'd use OGG over both, but it's not really a widely accepted format.

If you have to compress (for the internet), use high bit rate MP3 (160kbps is pretty good... higher is better). It's compatible, and pretty good. If you don't have to compress (if you're putting on CD), don't compress.

To be exact, there are lossless compression formats like APE, FLAC, and SHN that work very well and do not affect the sound quality. Unfortunately, compression is usually somewhere around 50%.

As far as lossy formats go, MP3 is the most universal. I like using RazorLame with the r3mix option that uses a variable bit rate (VBR). Rather than compressing the entire file the same, it uses more compression on parts that are simple and less compression on parts that are simple. Overall you get a better sounding file. See:
http://www.mp3-converter.com/bitrates.htm

Some people are scared of VBR MP3s, saying some software can't handle them. As far as I can tell, all mp3 players can play the files without a problem (even my old-school Rio PMP 300 can play them). Some burning software might not do so well, but if you want to burn a CD, you can always decode to WAV first.

Here's some more discussion from http://jthz.com/mp3/


VBR really is a no-brainer. Near the beginning and ending of a song (assuming it starts and ends softly), where the volume is lower, and the music is less "demanding" in terms of its encodability, it makes sense to drop the bit rate, simply because there's not much there to encode, and the wasted space is overkill. In the middle of the song, where it may be more complicated, the idea of giving the encoder the option of "bumping up" the rate on a frame-by-frame basis is great! You may end up with a file that's the same overall size as a 160kbit/s CBR, but that uses frames as low as 32 on the really dead parts, and as high as 320 on the really tough parts. The bitrate is dynamically adapting to keep the quality constant. To know that the whole file isn't bloated where it isn't necessary, is a real bonus. On top of that:
If you've ever listened to an MP3 of a complex song at a very low bitrate, you've probably heard the famous watery swishing sound, and artifacts in the treble or high end of the spectrum (such as cymbals), or the muffled tones at bass sounds. With Variable Bit Rate you can keep the song at a stable relative quality level by adjusting the compression rate according to the complexity of the encoded audio. Ogg Vorbis (and VBR in MP3) does this by automatically tuning a compression level for each particle of the input based upon the relative complexity of that slice of sound.

CBR stands for constant bit rate.

I really really don't like listening to 128 kbit/s MP3s. VBRs are pretty good though.

Probably more than you wanted to know, right?

I'd say save your songs as WAV files. Then you always have the highest quality version there for reference. Use external encoders (like RazorLame) to create compressed formats when you need compressed formats. If the WAV files are taking up too much space, use a lossless encoder (APE, FLAC, SHN) to cut file size in half while preserving sound quality.

Clear as mud?

[slimcharm]

oh yeah clear as mud..now what did you say? BTW Geisler..is that your picture?

they were not charging for the download..they were charging for hard copies $15. I downloaded it myself but when I tried to use it with the MP3 option , I did something wrong..hassles that are just not necessary..if I had been sent correct software..

I blasted the mbox's tech suport in my review at Amazon and am getting hit with negatives because of it..so what..people should know that an hour on hold with tech support is what they may be getting into if they buy the box.

On the plus side I used my digidesign coupon to purchase the hosting service..it gave me $120 off..and thus I paid $80 for a year of hosting..more than many sites indeed..but still its pretty turnkey and I can figure it out..

Will share website when its ready..