Mixing 128kbps Instrumentals?

[JackV]

For a track that should be as brilliant as a retail, would 128kbps be acceptable?

[DJ T.O.B]

i dont quite get what u mean ...
if you wanna have cd quality then mp3 128 is not acceptable, ull hear differences between mp3 128 and flac or wav
if you just wanna mix it down 128 is better than nothing

[Ray Finkle]

Anything under 320 is unacceptable.

[JackV]

i dont quite get what u mean ...
if you wanna have cd quality then mp3 128 is not acceptable, ull hear differences between mp3 128 and flac or wav
if you just wanna mix it down 128 is better than nothing

yeh i worded that wrong. but for a mix with a high expectation of appeal would 129 do?
i guess it wouldnt do, which is a shame, got some rare shit but only at 128 for fuk sake lol

Anything under 320 is unacceptable.

What about 192?
i read somewhere that 192 is very much the same as 320, the difference isnt noticeable or something. not sure, everything under 320 feels blunt, not sure if that because of my paranoia lol

[DJ T.O.B]

yeh i worded that wrong. but for a mix with a high expectation of appeal would 129 do?
i guess it wouldnt do, which is a shame, got some rare shit but only at 128 for fuk sake lol



What about 192?
i read somewhere that 192 is very much the same as 320, the difference isnt noticeable or something. not sure, everything under 320 feels blunt, not sure if that because of my paranoia lol

well its better to have a great mix in 128 than to not have the mix at all, so if the mix is worth it go for it, even if the beat isnt perfect quality or even if the acapella is perfect, if the idea of the mix is good then anything is better than nothing

about the quality, yeah well 192 is better than 128, i doubt there wont be differences noticeable on good speakers, to be save id go for 256 or better
4 example all my mixes i render to wav and later convert them to mp3 320 (to save space 4 sure, but the quality is great still)

[Nofew]

Personally I don't like 128.. and have excluded them from my playlist. The file size alone BUGS me at an average of just 3MB per track though If it's due to being restricted by availability then I guess it's fine.. I'm sure a lot of the bitrate woe's are due to psychology in wanting the best but I've grown accustom to 320kbps. If it's not 320 it never feels perfect or I'm left feeling if it was encoded at 320kbps it would be a perfect remix. lol. But then lately I've been left feeling a lot of the 320's I've got (158 tracks) are probably trans codes, re-encodes etc etc so Idk

If the quality's their then use it.. Just don't fake it please.. I know of at least 1 mixtape the bonus disc from LV's that was then, this is now mixtape was a fake 320Kbps upcode. Which I really didn't understand & got little comment when I questioned him about it loool so my trust is hmm

[skitzo]

A lot of the richness and clarity is lost on 128. They are flat compared to 320. If you go ahead with using it then you best post the finished mix in wave so it's not further degraded.

[L-Booma]

Personally I don't like 128.. and have excluded them from my playlist. The file size alone BUGS me at an average of just 3MB per track though If it's due to being restricted by availability then I guess it's fine.. I'm sure a lot of the bitrate woe's are due to psychology in wanting the best but I've grown accustom to 320kbps. If it's not 320 it never feels perfect or I'm left feeling if it was encoded at 320kbps it would be a perfect remix. lol. But then lately I've been left feeling a lot of the 320's I've got (158 tracks) are probably trans codes, re-encodes etc etc so Idk

If the quality's their then use it.. Just don't fake it please.. I know of at least 1 mixtape the bonus disc from LV's that was then, this is now mixtape was a fake 320Kbps upcode. Which I really didn't understand & got little comment when I questioned him about it loool so my trust is hmm

a fake 320 upcode? I just save all my mix files in wav and decode them back to 320 rips, cause wav is too big lol.

people use software to mix and use project files. When the mix is done, you save the project in wav, 320 or whatever. So i really have no clue how u can say 1 mix is a fake 320 lol.

Plus i can tell u, u cant hear any diff in a fake 320 or a real 320 fan made mix lol.
Nearly all the acapellas We have are only available in lower q then 320. So nearly all the remixes u hear are no real 320 files lol.

[KW]

a fake 320 upcode? I just save all my mix files in wav and decode them back to 320 rips, cause wav is too big lol.

people use software to mix and use project files. When the mix is done, you save the project in wav, 320 or whatever. So i really have no clue how u can say 1 mix is a fake 320 lol.

Saving a mix from 320 to Wav won't increase the quality, nor would saving an encoded 128 to 320 enhance it, this is just basic info I've gathered over the yurs, so when people do that, they're really just wasting their time, the only thing you can properly export to a Wav and get it's full quality from a project is a beat lol

[Nikola]

128 encode into 320 for better quality huh? Ill convert this old vhs footage of mine into blu ray now, wish me luck, i want that crystal clear depth of field.

/sarcasm

[L-Booma]

Saving a mix from 320 to Wav won't increase the quality, nor would saving an encoded 128 to 320 enhance it, this is just basic info I've gathered over the yurs, so when people do that, they're really just wasting their time, the only thing you can properly export to a Wav and get it's full quality from a project is a beat lol

Ofcourse I know that lol, Most instrumentals I use are 100% WAV rips from promo cd's or cd singles btw, this is the reason why I save my projects in WAV first.

I try to explain Nofew that moaning about a fake 320 for a fan made remix is useless lol.

For example: an acapella is 192, the beat is a 320 rip and some other elements are 256. People put all these files togheter in mixing software and save this project as a 320. Thats why nearly all fan made remixes are no real 320 or wav files. cause people use 192 acapellas or whatever.

Plus [MENTION=8689]Nofew, people dont try to fake people when making them 320. They make every remix of a mixtape the same file size (320, 192 whatever) so it looks better and more completeness . Or do you want a mixtape with 1 remix is 192, another one is 320, and another one is wav, and another one is 256? would look like a big mess and so amateurish.

[Nofew]

The acapella / speech doesn't matter as much. Usually those tend to be low bit-rates & retain better quality than the instrumentals that have been encoded to the same bitrate. In Rap probably Idk I'm not an expert but y'kno I gathered the 'remix scene' would have it's custom, standards, norms as to what's acceptable and not. I see some DJ's boasting & taking pride about releasing in 320.. tagged up as (CDQ) in the forums etc.

I know the acapellas vary in quality but if at least using the ones that are 192-256kbps mixed with a 320 instrumental that's been sourced from a CD then it's better sound quality then someone ripping music from a video stream of utube.. transcoding from 1 format to a another aswell as upcoding the bit-rate .

I don't have a problem with the current 320's It's just confusing when I see two different files at different bit-rates but their both same. I prefer consistency most the remixes I like are from DJ's who all encode @ 320 but every now and then they spit out a lower bitrate track which throws me off.

Take for example DJ Tricki's House of Pain (192kbps) and Cvince 192kbps Pain track the one which was edited to include an extra layer. The one previous to that was 320Kbps so are they both the same sound quality or vary.. :S

And for the record I am not moaning just querying lol you'll have Draven on my back