Jase

Are 192kbps MP3s of a high enough quality that they can stand up to playing
on a monster club sound system? I've heard recommendations of a higher
bitrate but would 192 suffice?

TIA.

lkng4chubs

Should be good enough, 192 is where you start losing the most quality. I'd
go 224 to be safe though.
"Jase" <jase@ibm.co.uk> wrote in message
news:c0bet6$130hmk$1@ID-83837.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Are 192kbps MP3s of a high enough quality that they can stand up to
playing
> on a monster club sound system? I've heard recommendations of a higher
> bitrate but would 192 suffice?
>
> TIA.
>
>

megabite

I routinely play 128 kbps with no problem whatsoever, Large venue systems
featuring 15" - 18" speakers often do not have enough fidelity to
distinguish the difference. I can (barely though) decifer a minute
difference on some 12" 3 way Cerwin Vegas finely tuned on a Harmon Kardon
Home Theater Amp. even then, it's at the higher freqs e.g. bells, chimes,
cymbals, etc. and only very very slight. I doubt that Night Club Nick and
his homies would ever know the difference.
"Jase" <jase@ibm.co.uk> wrote in message
news:c0bt6$130hmk$1@ID-83837.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Are 192kbps MP3s of a high enough quality that they can stand up to
playing
> on a monster club sound system? I've heard recommendations of a higher
> bitrate but would 192 suffice?
>
> TIA.
>
>

Geoffrey

Jase <jase@ibm.co.uk> wrote:

> Are 192kbps MP3s of a high enough quality that they can stand up to
> playing on a monster club sound system? I've heard recommendations of a
> higher bitrate but would 192 suffice?

Depends on what you mean by "big".

My ears are well trained enough so that I can hear when a
'reconstituted' (MP3 to WAV then burnt to CD) track is being played on a
well tuned system thats rated at 2 kW or more -- the low end bass sounds
'dead' and a lot of the high frequency stuff (cymbals, hi-hats, noise
based percussion) comes over as 'crunchy'.

I was at an outdoor party on the weekend where we trialled 12 kW worth
of the new KV2 sound gear, and one of the last-up DJs dropped several
reconstituted trance tracks into his set, and *boy* could we tell the
difference.

In short: Anything less than 320k is okay for playback on domestic gear
(computer spekers, portable players etc), but if you want to play on a
big system, 320k is the *minimum* I would recommend.


Geoffrey

(remove EXCESS BAGGAGE to reply via mail)
--
WARNING: mail to this address will be auto-bounced if:
(a) more than 10% original content appears before first quoted matter,
(b) quoted material exceeds 75% of total message content, and/or
(c) HTML is used to format text and/or embed non-ASCII items.

Lucy Explainin

We run 10k Court and it's near impossible to spot ant difference between
192kbps and 256-300. However it's easy to spot the 128.

Thats as it is for us. We do find that 192 still sounds better than minidisc
and playing one after any 192kbps mp3 sands out like a sore thumb for
quality drop.

Jase

"Lucy Explainin" <burp@blop.com> wrote in message
news:KbkWb.2027$h44.392994@stones.force9.net...
> We run 10k Court and it's near impossible to spot ant difference between
> 192kbps and 256-300. However it's easy to spot the 128.
>
> Thats as it is for us. We do find that 192 still sounds better than
minidisc
> and playing one after any 192kbps mp3 sands out like a sore thumb for
> quality drop.

That sounds like good news then because I have a lot of techno tracks at
192kbps.

Temp3st

"Jase" <jase@ibm.co.uk> wrote in message
news:c0bet6$130hmk$1@ID-83837.news.uni-berlin.de...
> Are 192kbps MP3s of a high enough quality that they can stand up to
playing
> on a monster club sound system? I've heard recommendations of a higher
> bitrate but would 192 suffice?
>
> TIA.
>
>

192 is fine.
In fact you could prolly get away with a mono recording in a club without
anyone noticing.
You might also find that encoding in 8-bit rather than 16 bit gives much
more 'punch' through most club sound systems.

dilvie

I totally disagree. MOST club systems are not set up as ideal listening
machines. They're set up to thump -- hard. The high-ends get mangled
anyway, because club installers aren't watching out for phase
distortion, they're more concerned with coverage. Under those
circumstances, a 192k .mp3 should sound just fine, but you're better off
with 192k .ogg files, as the high frequency mangling is even less
noticeable. If you can do better, you'll probably want to -- always do
the best you can.

As for "okay on domestic gear" -- again, I totally disagree. On a
decent pair of consumer headphones, or a decent home stereo system,
you'll be able to hear the distortion a LOT more clearly than you can
hear it in a packed club full of all kinds of ambient noise with
speakers pointed in 12 different directions generating all kinds of
phase-incoherence.

As an engineer who has installed club systems and professional recording
studios, and a DJ who drops .mp3's, .oggs, vinyl, and CD's, I can tell
you that 192k .oggs will sound just fine on a club system -- provided
that they match the frequency spectrum of the other music you are
playing fairly well -- which is never guaranteed if you're dropping some
desktop producer's new track that they mixed on their leet bass-reflex
home stereo with 3-band graphic EQ. That will make a LOT more
difference than you'll hear between 192k and 320k encoding.

If you're dropping indie desktop music, make sure you've listened to the
tracks next to the sounds of professional producers, and it holds up
well on your professional reference monitors (you do own a pair, don't
you?) You'll hear a LOT more detail on those than you'll hear in even
the best tuned club on a busy night -- guaranteed.

- Eric

Geoffrey wrote:

> Jase <jase@ibm.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>Are 192kbps MP3s of a high enough quality that they can stand up to
>>playing on a monster club sound system? I've heard recommendations of a
>>higher bitrate but would 192 suffice?
>
>
> Depends on what you mean by "big".
>
> My ears are well trained enough so that I can hear when a
> 'reconstituted' (MP3 to WAV then burnt to CD) track is being played on a
> well tuned system thats rated at 2 kW or more -- the low end bass sounds
> 'dead' and a lot of the high frequency stuff (cymbals, hi-hats, noise
> based percussion) comes over as 'crunchy'.
>
> I was at an outdoor party on the weekend where we trialled 12 kW worth
> of the new KV2 sound gear, and one of the last-up DJs dropped several
> reconstituted trance tracks into his set, and *boy* could we tell the
> difference.
>
> In short: Anything less than 320k is okay for playback on domestic gear
> (computer spekers, portable players etc), but if you want to play on a
> big system, 320k is the *minimum* I would recommend.


--
~
<http://www.dilvie.com/>

dilvie

Gotta call the BS. 8-bit will add a lot of aliasing noise, and it
reduces the clarity of high and low frequencies alike. Cranking it down
to 8-bit will produce effects that sound worse than cranking the bitrate
down to 128k. If you're looking for that scratchy nintendo sound, that
would definately do it, but there are better ways to chunk up your set
than to encode all your tracks in 8-bit precision.

> You might also find that encoding in 8-bit rather than 16 bit gives much
> more 'punch' through most club sound systems.

--
~
<http://www.dilvie.com/>

Lucy Explainin

"dilvie" <dilvie@removethiss.dilvie.com> wrote in message
news:rwvWb.279198$xy6.1422720@attbi_s02...
Err what post are you calling bullshit???

I don't see the original quoted anywhere.....

Temp3st

"dilvie" <dilvie@removethiss.dilvie.com> wrote in message
news:rwvWb.279198$xy6.1422720@attbi_s02...
> Gotta call the BS. 8-bit will add a lot of aliasing noise, and it
> reduces the clarity of high and low frequencies alike. Cranking it down
> to 8-bit will produce effects that sound worse than cranking the bitrate
> down to 128k. If you're looking for that scratchy nintendo sound, that
> would definately do it, but there are better ways to chunk up your set
> than to encode all your tracks in 8-bit precision.
>
> > You might also find that encoding in 8-bit rather than 16 bit gives much
> > more 'punch' through most club sound systems.
>
> --
> ~
> <http://www.dilvie.com/>
>

It sounds fine - because I've done it and I also know a lot of DJ's and
producers who also do it - so please drop the B.S reference.
If you don't agree then fine - but don't insult me - just makes you look
like a twat!

Tomislav Crncic

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.music.makers.dj.]
On 2004-02-10, Jase <jase@ibm.co.uk> wrote:
> Are 192kbps MP3s of a high enough quality that they can stand up to playing
> on a monster club sound system? I've heard recommendations of a higher
> bitrate but would 192 suffice?

yes it will. however, the more important is the codec, and not the actual
bitrate. 192 kbps lame encoded file sounds better than
320 kbps xing.

--
Tech Support: "I need you to boot the computer."
Customer: (THUMP! Pause.) "No, that didn't help."

Freddie Frinton

I've never heard such a load of old bollox!
What's wrong with two turntables, a mixer, and a box full of sweet smelling vinyl?

Freddie

The spirit of the people is greater than man's technology.


"Jase" <jase@ibm.co.uk> wrote in message news:<c0bet6$130hmk$1@ID-83837.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> Are 192kbps MP3s of a high enough quality that they can stand up to playing
> on a monster club sound system? I've heard recommendations of a higher
> bitrate but would 192 suffice?
>
> TIA.

Phil McCavity

Tomislav Crncic wrote:

"192 kbps lame encoded file sounds better than 320 kbps xing."
Ain't that the truth......

--

begin Outlook express still does it.exe

Tomislav Crncic

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.music.makers.dj.]
On 2004-02-18, Freddie Frinton <freddiefrinton@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I've never heard such a load of old bollox!
> What's wrong with two turntables, a mixer, and a box full of sweet smelling vinyl?
>
> Freddie
>
> The spirit of the people is greater than man's technology.

and the music is greater than the media it's on.
all the turntable-lovers seem to forget that.

--
Tech Support: "I need you to boot the computer."
Customer: (THUMP! Pause.) "No, that didn't help."