sammyhkhan Posted June 28, 2007 Author Share Posted June 28, 2007 I'll tell you from my experience... spinning with mp3's just doesn't feel right... I prefer cd... Cheers bud, a mature approach to expressing your opinion! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supergroover Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 didnt they do a pretty extensive test on isratrance a while ago? whether people could here the difference between mp3 and wav. anybody know the results? with 320 i dont know. feels like there is not much difference. but to be sure i ll just play with wav or flac only below 320 its pretty obvious sometimes.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abasio Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 I've never heard anyone DJ with MP3s! It would feel a bit wierd to Mix with MP3s, like your not really spinning or something! As for the quality, my hearing is shot to hell, I can't tell the difference even with 198 thingies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nurbs Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 So then, all live acts suck as well since they have to play from their computer stuff? I have seen Technics and Pioneer players completely go bonkers as well while the dj was playing. Bad argument, since I always bring a backup set of cds and some vinyl... Well, what diffrence is there with almost all psy djs spinning cds with bpm counters... they are just as the bpm counters on any good mixprogram (Traktor, Serato, Torq etc etc) not reliable, and even if you get a QUIET accurate result, you always have to finetune the bpm until its perfect. What pisses me off is that people seem to think that there is nothing behind it to become a computer jockey (CJ HAHA). What I am saying is that I like to take things to the limits, and with a computer you can really reach them. At one point I was mixing with 4 decks and effects (Vinyl) with the computer I can do so much more, adding loops, adding effects, adding samples, reverse things on the fly... you name it. Well.. and yes, I do consider myself a PROPER DJ, if not beyond. (Sounds arrogant, I know, sorry!) Live acts?? Maybe you are talking about ''live'' acts cause as far as i remember in the the before laptop's ''century'' things were different If you hear a difference between 320Kbps mp3 file from beatport to original file you are clearly wasting your time posting on this forum. You just called quite a lot dj's unprofessionals. And not just soulseek/e-mule/dc++ dj's. Also many mainstream and a few psy dj's that use the beatport service. I think it's time to pull the banana out of your ears/ass, enjoy the music and stop talking about stuff you have absolutely no idea about. :wank: Ya, most of the times i can tell the different between mp3 and wma . Bananas and cucumbers of my ears many years now but thanks for the tip :wank: Wrong. There are no bad PC's, only bad users. My WinXP didn't crash since the day i installed it. Which is well over a year. If you bring a laptop to play at very humid and hot environment and expecting it to work flawlessly than maybe you are not that smart. If you use a clean installation of WinXP/MacOS and never connect to Internet with it or playing games you should be safe. It's a work tool and the Dj's/Artists that use it should never forget that. Got right about bad users but it still sucks when something like that happens. Big label party and they bring only one laptop with them and it fails, wtf ?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pawelek Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Living in New Zealand it just seems more practical to buy music via beatport.com and audiojelly.com Your experiences and philosophies with all forms of digital media (excluding CDs) are much appreciated... If party has high-end soundsystem DJ's could play from original wav files... But anyways playing from mp3 sucks big time. Living in poland i can easily say 90% or if not everybody plys from vbr-mp3 leeched in internet. Of course im not mentioning the few ones that play from 12" My opinion about playing from mp3s - its realy bad...but this is only me. Im not DJ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fohat Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 there is a similar thread on isratrance more focused on laptop djing than spinning with mp3's, but worth checking it. back to subject here: although most people are not able to tell the difference between 320mp3's and WAV files, i see no reason at all spinning mp3's. it's imo a matter of ethics towards the artists and the audience to buy and play original quality. 100% of the releases which can be found at digital download stores like beatport/trackitdown are available as wav files. if a dj get's money for his spinning he should give something back to the artists. i don't wanna pretend beeing hypermoralistic, but if i don't get a track as original source, i don't play it as mp3 downloaded from the p2p networks. my life is hard enough to deal with bad reputation and all the prejudices against laptop dj's ;-) @nemo: what software are you using? live or traktor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sideffect... Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 well, as many have tolld it allready in other numerous threads - normal person [that would be psy shanti baba] wont probably tell that its 320kbps mp3 playing, unless told so. so nothing wrong with what you "spin", what matters is what you make out of it. imo.to be honest I have to agree with reger, where's my medicine no matter how the music is brought technical to the people if it works, it works... simple as that, no one on the dance floor will argue with that if they are enjoying them self or itself or whatever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malevol3nt Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Well in these future days of high-capacity disks like blu ray for example, it shouldn't be too hard to carry all those wavs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sideffect... Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Well in these future days of high-capacity disks like blu ray for example, it shouldn't be too hard to carry all those wavs. no difference, we already have external HDD, if pioneer manages to create mixing with blue ray, two discs, that'll be... seems handy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorn726 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 although 320 mp3s aren't terrible, the difference from wavs is tremendous. you can't make something 5x smaller and have it sound as good, you just can't. WORSE- i've had djs tell me how "oh 192k is fine" yeah freaking right, it's horrible. i've honestly been pretty disappointed by vinyl compared cd to but anyway..... one great example was watching ollie play full on cds for a few hours, and then the next dj comes one with all mp3s. the sound just dropped out totally. if you want to mix on a laptop, get a FAT hard drive and run WAVS through traktor or whatever the current proggy is, but mp3s= half the point of going out is to experience the FULL loud sound. mp3s are a gyp in that sense. a real waste of all that expensive sound equipt, it's reaLLy a shame we moved backwards with supposedly "forward" tech Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorn726 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 ok i have to take this a little farther= although most people are not able to tell the difference between 320mp3's and WAV files this is some flawed logic. First- if they never heard it full qual, of course they don't know the system at a party being so big compared to home systems, anything will sound bigger and better (almost) worse, we have uneducated everyone to accept lower quality audio as the real deal. IF you played the same track over a big system first in 320, then in WAV- EVERYONE would know the difference. i can fully tell the difference even on my crappy home system SO- is it really cool to say "ehh, they can't tell the difference?" are party goers to be looked at as the same sheep we find everywhere else? i dunno, seems like trance djs should be better than that, instead of basically saying 90% of everyone is too stupid to tell the differnce. besides, what about the 10% of us who do notice? i know sometimes it is a money issue but in general it only takes a little more effort and storage space to have full quality. if djs are only playing for the lowest common denominator, the trance music scene is no better than top 40 radio stripped down mp3s lack bass, fullness and clarity of full quality wavs, and it's also been shown people generally put the volume too loud with mp3s, trying to pump the non existent bass up and only raising the hearing damaging trebles it would be really great if djs would try hard not to use mp3s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slyman2.0 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 sorry this 320 mp3 vs wave at a party is nonsense. there is no way you can tell the difference at a party. maybe at home with some good higher end studio monitors you might be able to tell the difference. at a party though the system itself is going to color the sound a 1000 times more than mp3 vs wav. i bet if you took 2 laptop djs, told everyone one guy was spinning wavs, one guy was spinning mp3s but in reality you switched them, everyone would say the wavs sound like shit and they can hear how much clearer the mp3s were.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goa Bill Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 sorry this 320 mp3 vs wave at a party is nonsense. there is no way you can tell the difference at a party. maybe at home with some good higher end studio monitors you might be able to tell the difference. at a party though the system itself is going to color the sound a 1000 times more than mp3 vs wav. i bet if you took 2 laptop djs, told everyone one guy was spinning wavs, one guy was spinning mp3s but in reality you switched them, everyone would say the wavs sound like shit and they can hear how much clearer the mp3s were.... Heck this, in most of the parties you can't even get the Stereo image from the speakers. I donno to what parties people here go to but where i go it's mostly loudness over quality issue. With all my years of listening to music and actually studying sound and training my ears to do proper mixes and eq while partying i make sure i am properly fucked and enjoying the music AS IT IS and if there are people that prefer to debate 320Kbps MP3 VS WAV in the party than well they have a problem. Loosen up people, you drive many miles to god's forsaken place and you trouble yourself with such minor issue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goa Bill Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 ok i have to take this a little farther= this is some flawed logic. First- if they never heard it full qual, of course they don't know the system at a party being so big compared to home systems, anything will sound bigger and better (almost) worse, we have uneducated everyone to accept lower quality audio as the real deal. IF you played the same track over a big system first in 320, then in WAV- EVERYONE would know the difference. i can fully tell the difference even on my crappy home system SO- is it really cool to say "ehh, they can't tell the difference?" are party goers to be looked at as the same sheep we find everywhere else? i dunno, seems like trance djs should be better than that, instead of basically saying 90% of everyone is too stupid to tell the differnce. besides, what about the 10% of us who do notice? i know sometimes it is a money issue but in general it only takes a little more effort and storage space to have full quality. if djs are only playing for the lowest common denominator, the trance music scene is no better than top 40 radio stripped down mp3s lack bass, fullness and clarity of full quality wavs, and it's also been shown people generally put the volume too loud with mp3s, trying to pump the non existent bass up and only raising the hearing damaging trebles it would be really great if djs would try hard not to use mp3s 1 question. Have you ever done a proper blind test? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supergroover Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 feels like a blind test is needed.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slyman2.0 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 listening test with mp3 vs cd, $18k setup with a bunch of super audiophiles listening http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/lofive...php/t27324.html some people picked the 128k mp3 to sound better at some points, hahah. if anyone thinks they can hear the difference between flac vs wav they are an idiot and dont understand what flac is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abasio Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 listening test with mp3 vs cd, $18k setup with a bunch of super audiophiles listening http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/lofive...php/t27324.html some people picked the 128k mp3 to sound better at some points, hahah. if anyone thinks they can hear the difference between flac vs wav they are an idiot and dont understand what flac is. I don't know what flac is But then I can't tell the difference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reger Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 hey, slyman, what did you do with 604 ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abasio Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 hey, slyman, what did you do with 604 ?A different guy slyman604 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reger Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 who said so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filitico Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 mp3s get the job done just fine... ask anyone who has had their priceless vinyl collection robbed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supergroover Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 i don't know everything about mp3's but isnt especially the bass cut off with the making of mp3's? if so with classical music there is less bass i assume so might it be easier to find the difference between wave and mp3 in psy than in classical (the musical type they used in the article referred to above)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherlockalien Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 i don't know everything about mp3's but isnt especially the bass cut off with the making of mp3's? if so with classical music there is less bass i assume so might it be easier to find the difference between wave and mp3 in psy than in classical (the musical type they used in the article referred to above)? afaik, the default of mp3 is to cut off all frequencies above 20khz and below 20hz, which supposedly are the limits to the human hearing too.... So whether they cut more bass than high frequencies depends if the original file had much information lower to 20hz or above 20khz.. that being said... I dont know if I could notice the difference between a high quality mp3 file and a wav or flac. Probably not.. if someone is willing to set up a blind test, that would be interesting... pavel maybe? (though I dont want to test myself with some full on track with billions of sounds at the same time.. rather some good production detailed fat progressive, like antix) .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaze Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 I remember reading somewhere that quick blind tests can't be effective for checking MP3/WAV differencies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherlockalien Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 I remember reading somewhere that quick blind tests can't be effective for checking MP3/WAV differencies why not? I mean, its not testing the differences between the files, but the ability of the listener to distinguish those differences.. I dont see why a blind test would not work.. I mean, sure, if by ´quick´ you mean using some 10 sec samples to compare and not a few whole tracks, then you could be right... but making blind tests with a few whole tracks I guess is effective enough, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.