rcb4real

MP3, WAV & Physical vs Storage Space - What's your opinion? Please vote!

MP3 vs WAV & Physical formats - What's your opinion? Please vote!  

19 members have voted

  1. 1. Let's take the German Yellow CD Singles as an example. Everybody knows they have terrible sound quality. Now speaking of digital files, would you rather have:

    • physical media, since you can afford buying anything including rare and expensive promos with exclusive versions, and also have a "fancy" sound system so this is not a problem
      4
    • an untouched WAV or FLAC rip of a track, even if it sounds terrible (extremely low volume and poor EQ), because it will be an original and lossless rip and that's what matters (consider this if you have a "fancy" sound system that "fixes" the issue or if you can afford storing tons large files)
      9
    • a remastered MP3 file (320 kbps, maximum quality) that will sound way better than the original (with louder volume and greater EQ - like the 2001 Warner Remasters) even though it will be lossy (please don't say an MP3 file will never sound better than a WAV file because the point here is not the bitrate, it's HOW it sounds)
      4
    • a remastered WAV or FLAC rip
      1
    • an untouched MP3 file, I just wanna listen and I don't really care about how it sounds (I even listen on YouTube or Spotify)
      1


Recommended Posts

I can't afford storing tons large files plus I don't have a fancy sound system, so the remastered MP3s are perfect to me. Speaking of physical I only buy what I think it's essential (and I can afford of course, lol).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 (with louder volume and greater EQ - like the 2001 Warner Remasters)

:Madonna009:

Please, learn what is the loudness war. The problem is not the EQ, the problem is the volume.

 

I prefer a proper remastered track with a good EQ (physical, flac or Wav). If i want my music louder i will turn my volume up. I don't want compressed music. The 2001 Warner Remasters are compressed (the EQ is fine).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Aiwa08 said:

Please, learn what is the loudness war. The problem is not the EQ, the problem is the volume.

I learned about that, very interesting. I guess it was you who sent me this link but I forgot to comment later, lol.


I still think louder is better, but a limit must be respected. I think they made a great job with Madonna's Warner Remasters CDs (for someone that doesn't have a fancy sound system, that's amazing). Britney's Outrageous Japan EP for example, has even louder volume (I'd say 10% louder), but is still acceptable in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, rcb4real said:

I learned about that, very interesting. I guess it was you who sent me this link but I forgot to comment later, lol.


I still think louder is better, but a limit must be respected. I think they made a great job with Madonna's Warner Remasters CDs (for someone that doesn't have a fancy sound system, that's amazing). Britney's Outrageous Japan EP for example, has even louder volume (I'd say 10% louder), but is still acceptable in my opinion.

So do you prefer a destroyed/compressed song because you don't want to turn the volume up in your stereo player? (Remember, the EQ can be changed without any problem).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aiwa08 said:

So do you prefer a destroyed/compressed song because you don't want to turn the volume up in your stereo player? (Remember, the EQ can be changed without any problem).

No way, I think you're not getting the idea. 

Again, I'm gonna use the yellow CDs as an example. Since their volume is extremely low - when you don't have a fancy equipment - even if you set the volume to the max, it won't still be loud enough. 

In my stereo: Max Vol. is 63, I usually listen between 50-55 (depends on the source), which is fine. If I put a Yellow CD to play, even at 63 it will still sound low. This is why I like remastered material.

Now about MP3, it's not that I like compressed files. It's just what works for me, since I don't have lots of space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are mixing different concepts. We are no talking about MP3 compressed files, we are talking about "dynamic range" compression.

   The dynamic range compression affects everything (wav, physical, mp3, etc). When the dynamic range is compressed you can't restored to the original form. You can remaster a song, you can change the EQ, and you can turn the volume up until certain point. When you pass this point, you are compressing the dynamic range. 

The yellow CDs are the worst example. They aren't mastered to be edited on CD, so the volume and the EQ are totally wrong. But you can restored (remastered) a yellow CD because the original wav is not compressed or altered. You can't restored any song from the "2001 remastered CDs" because all the songs have the dynamic range compressed. They sound better because the EQ is very good, not because the volume is higher.

More info about loudness war and Madonna (Green is good, Red is bad):

http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list/album?artist=madonna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've a laptop plugged into an amplifier and speakers.
It all depends on how a file was recorded.
Physical Formats can scratch/warp or 'chew' but they don't corrupt and vanish unless you throw a record/tape etc out the window.




 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, i really HATE Large files like WAV & FLAC but i also hate converting into mp3s as it just boosts up my anxiety and have to wait 5 to 20 minutes for the songs to convert. Yet my phone runs out of space and i have to delete songs i don't listen too..

 

i prefer either remastered mp3 at the high quality of 320kps or untouched (of course if it sounds good)

the only reason why i still have the demo assembly in WAV is because it was something i really wanted and i didn't want mp3 because it could possibly change the way it sounds (QUALITY)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, AddictedToUrMDNA said:

To be honest, i really HATE Large files like WAV & FLAC but i also hate converting into mp3s as it just boosts up my anxiety and have to wait 5 to 20 minutes for the songs to convert. Yet my phone runs out of space and i have to delete songs i don't listen too..

i prefer either remastered mp3 at the high quality of 320kps or untouched (of course if it sounds good)

the only reason why i still have the demo assembly in WAV is because it was something i really wanted and i didn't want mp3 because it could possibly change the way it sounds (QUALITY)

I think so many people hate and judge MP3 (before listening) because they had bad experiencies or don't know how to work with the format. They never understand when I say an HQ MP3 file can sound (I said sound, not be) better than a WAV one.

One thing is to listen to a 320kbps file encoded in maximum quality with a good software, other is to listen to a quicky encoded 128kbps file in an ordinary software. You can't put them in the same box. I know people that can't notice the bitrate difference but I can say from my experience that MP3 must be at least 256kbps. 

Why I have to prefer MP3 (it's not just a choice, it was my only option since the beginning):

My entire music collection (all Mp3 256-320 kbps) is so far 417gb, and I only have a 4tb HD. IF I wanted to have everything I have in WAV (considering it would be possible) I would need around 2tb just for my music folder. With the rest of stuff I have (movies, DVDs, etc) I would need at least a 8tb HD, which I couldn't and still can't afford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.