Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.
-
Your splitting hairs now Darren, as I said I would put a wager on it.
There is inevitable gonna be some difference as its compressed down but you will be hard pressed to notice, I don't reckon Graham would notice anything especially within a disco environment, in fact I reckon he would be quite surprised in how good they actually sound for such a small file.
-
-
Swine
-
Using a higher bitrate will have better sound quality but using pa systems like what we use, I don't think you will notice the difference. Maby if you use touring grade pa speakers then you might hear a difference. I don't know.
If you are using super high end components, like what audiophiles use, then you will hear a difference.
-
Originally Posted by
One Vision
Your splitting hairs now Darren,
No, I am not. I am disagreeing with a statement that you made. You cannot possibly know what other people hear.
That's what you said and that's what I disagree with. Read your posts back and stop trying to wriggle out of a ridiculous statement.
-
Originally Posted by
Grahame Case
been reading around, lots of people recommending WAV over mp3 because it is cleaner. i'm an MP3 fan myself, but might be swayed to use wav because storage is so cheap.
and I thought I was being a little over the top by ripping in WAV, but as storage is pretty cheap these days and my collection is only around 4,000 tracks - I could probably get it all on a pocket drive, and 1TB HDDs are fairly cheap ish these days too.
Originally Posted by
Grahame Case
definitely thinking that ripping to WAV is a good starter for master copies, then converting later to MP3 for transfer to portable HDD
That is exactly what I have done. My Ipod is obviously for personal listening through earphones, so 320kbps will always be fine (especially with ear buds).
But it's nice to have the WAV Copy there for other uses.
It took me about (see below) for a few less than 4,000 tracks.
24 Hours = 4,000
and that was doing a bit each night for around 2 weeks, thank goodness my collection wasn't any larger.
Originally Posted by
Solitaire Entertainments Ltd
The point I am trying to make is that it takes a great deal of time ripping CD and I can't see the point ripping to wav and then to Mp3s after that!
WAV for DJing (if you want 1411s) and MP3s for personal use.
ITunes does it just by selecting all the relevant tracks, right clicking, and
"Create MP3 Version" as Rob will know
Originally Posted by
Solitaire Entertainments Ltd
I have ripped my CDs 3 times now (for various reasons) and know how mind numbingly boring it is!
Have you had a PC Crash
Originally Posted by
Grahame Case
it all depends on your playback system
Indeed
Originally Posted by
vectisvibe
Yep. And age / years DJing plays a big part. When I let my roadie EQ up it always sounds better than when I do it myself
and you're still in the Job
I have heard laptop DJs before, and I'd be very surprised if they used WAV Files, so guessing it's MP3s - sounded fine on a pair of Carlsbro Gammas, they were turned up incredibly loud though.
There will be a point in the future where you can fit your entire collection (without going into numbers here) on a USB Flash Drive.
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules