Printable View
I recently bought a track ('Bias - Just Mike") on Beatport, as WAV. When I used it on Ableton to make a podcast I saw that it distorted at the end of the intro (actually it sounds like a lame MP3 at this particular point).
I never heard a 1411kbps/16bit WAV distort, like going further than 0db.
Is that normal? Or the producer is simply a noob?
What can I do to fix this track so I can play it on cubs? if it is actually possible
Thanks :D
You can clip any type of file, WAVs included. Having a 16 bit depth means you have a maximum dynamic range of 96dB, whereas a 24 bit file has a maximum range of 144dB.
Have you tried playing the file in another program in case your gain staging is off?
Edit: Where exactly is your file clipping? The Youtube version sounds ok to me.
When I;ve had problems with Juno, I've simply emailed them and they have always given me a credit on the product I purchased.
It is one of the reasons why I like shopping at Juno despite the higher prices. Their service is top notch.
Actually after you said to test on other software I tryed Adobe Audition and it seems its not going further than 0db.
But it sounds bad at 0:59.
Well, I think there is nothing I can do right? this guy simply did not pay too much attention on this particular point i guess
I would check it out with Beatport and try a re-downoad
No wonder it doesn't go further than 0 dB, since 0 dB (FS) is the absolute maximum level for digital signals. If a signal would go further than 0 db FS it gets cut off (-> clipping), leading to a square waveform. This is what you perceive at distortion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniboy
This should not happen in a file that's been properly mixed and mastered.
Like the others said, just contact beatport and try to work something out.
Quite a bit of modern music is quite poorly mastered IMO, particularly with dance music. It's often mastered to be loud as feck which can affect the overall sound quality and occasionally make a tune sound like it's clipping. I wish we could go back to the pre-loudness wars era. I'm perfectly capable of turning the volume up if a song is too quiet. :D
listening to youtube version, it sounds alright, maybe it was just too squashed during the mastering
Why should the youtube version have different mastering compared to the wave file sold on beatport? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by johney
All digital copies of a track, no matter the format, will be made from the same source file.
There's basically three possible reasons I can think of why the youtube version sounds better than the wave file:
1. Someone applied further processing (post-mastering) to the beatport file, but why the hell should anyone do something that stupid?
2. The beatport file somehow got corrupted, even though I can't imagine how corrupted data should affact the sound quality of the file like the OP described.
3. Since youtube is streaming audio in 128 kbps mp3 format, the bad mastering job gets masked behind the artefacts of the low quality, compressed audio.... ;)
i meant, i heard what he may be interpreting as clipping (pad hitting at 1:02) but i think that's either to the master/mix or the pad itself is meant to be a bit distorted, everything else sounds clean
Maybe music is mastered differently for videos.Quote:
Originally Posted by TCMuc
There was a discussion on DJ Forums a while ago about a Krewella track which is particularly badly mastered and sounds like crap. The CD version has been "sausaged" to fuck, but the audio from the music video sounds OK (in terms of mastering - I hate the song, haha).
Here's the 2 compared, with the top waveform being from the video and the bottom one from the CD version: -
http://i.imgur.com/5euDRyq.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJSigma
Without the example/proof I probably would have been like - "nah, why the heck would anyone do that..."
Still.... - why the heck would anyone
a) make different masters for video- and download/CD-versions of a track?
b) use the better version for youtube, where people will listen to it via 128 kbps stream over crappy laptop speakers and sell consumers/DJs that more likely will play the track on hifi-systems or club pas a version that clips or otherwise sounds like sh*t?
A read of this article might answer some of those questions :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TCMuc
In a nutshell, mastering can and is done for many racks for the intended source and its limitations.
e.g. if you are mastering for a 128kbps video, you might enhance certain frequencies that might be noticeably missing from the original WAV if it was a straight conversion.
I think the answer to that is related to why this "loudness war" crap exists in the first place. It's to try and make tracks stand out from others. That's more applicable to audio-only formats than video.
Heh-heh... Sausaged.
Attachment 20590
HD Youtube videos have 192k AAC audio, which is pretty much transparent.
Recently I also came across a clipped track (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5si0yoVdIg), whats even worse - it's a free download so you "can't" complain. Shame :(
Where's the clipping?
Shit plugin all around. I never touch that POS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patch
Downloaded file. Yes, YT version doesn't sound clipped but have no idea why: different master/ing or lower quality audio hides it :blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by makar1