Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 I was talking to a mastering/tracking engineer last weekend. The guy seemed to know what he was doing, had good equipment, is a gear slut, and got good recordings. But when we got to the subject of MP3s, he said something that struck me as bizarre. The songwriter and I were talking about MP3s, and I mentioned something about it being a lossy format. The engineer suddenly interjected and said, "No, it's not." Surprised, the songwriter and I turned around as he continued. "It's not a lossy format. It's like a .jpg. It uses a compression algorithm, but you can revert it back to its former state, turning an MP3 back into a lossless WAV or AIFF file, or a .jpg back into a TIFF file without any loss." I replied, "No, both those are lossy formats. Once it's converted, you've lost that information. If what you were saying is true, people would send their individual files as 64kbps MP3s, and someone would download and reconvert them without any trouble. Also, .jpgs are lossy. You can convert them to TIFFs, sure, but once you've chucked the information, that's it." The singer mentioned that he unfortunately could not try these conversions because he didn't have Pro Tools, so I said, "Try this. You have iTunes. Convert an AIFF file to a 64kbps MP3. Now convert it back to an AIFF file. What does it sound like?" Then the mastering/tracking engineer said something that was surprising (and I was surprised that he was trying to make this point so forcefully as well). "Well, then, something in the MP3 process has been altered so that it doesn't open back up to a full lossless format such as AIFF. Think of it this way. Converting an MP3 is sort of like creating a WinZip file. It's all there, but simply compressed, and at another point, if you are using a program other than iTunes that is not restrictive, you can open up the MP3 again just like unzipping a WinZip file. Just like nothing is missing when you open a WinZip file, nothing would be missing from the MP3 as well if it is opened up correctly." I said that this did not sound right, and I have never heard of anyone doing that. Furthermore, I did a search on the internet and could not find a single reference to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Nod as if in agreement, smile, distract him with something shiny, change the subject to puppies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 10, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 I was especially taken aback since he seemed so knowledgeable otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gus Lozada Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 He surely thinks that because you can burn a CD out from MP3s to play in a standard CD player, you can fully restore the MP3 to a WAV or AIFF. False. MP3 is lossy. Once it's gone, it's gone. It can be converted back into a WAV file, but not with its original quality. Why Compress??- Eliminate redundancy- Most basic encoder/decoder is PCM- Lots of redundancy b/c PCM representation is a basicsine wave- If representing the sine wave based on frequencyrather than time, only need to store informationregarding frequency, amplitude, and phase in orderto represent the information- Can reduce data without information loss- Extends playing time, Allows for miniaturization andgreater equipment tolerance, Reduces costLossless vs. Lossy (Perceptive)- Lossless coding allows perfect reconstructionof a signal (theoretically)- Lossy Coding creates a more highlycompressed signal, but some unnecessaryfrequencies are eliminated- Perceptually, however, lossy coding results inno difference in how it SOUNDS to a person- MP3s are lossy, but perceptually lossless SOURCE Your friend's analogy to ZIP files is also incorrect. You can NOT read ZIP files prior decompressing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Maybe he was just having a bad day and was thinking of FLAC or Shorten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Billster Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 I think he is correct as far as mp3 being a compression algorithm, but my understanding is that the data deemed "unneccesary" is discarded before the new, compressed file is saved. My (vague) understanding is that with mp3, the discard decisions are made in response to the program material, while a WinZip compression is done in a consistent manner which the companion expander program has the algorithm necessary for restoring the data when reversing the compression process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Billster Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by Gus Lozada MP3s are lossy, but perceptually lossless SOURCE Particularly if you've lost some perception by standing too close to the amps for too long. I've got a touch of tinnitus, and can still hear a difference between mp3 & aif. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Alndln2 Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 Originally posted by Gus Lozada MP3 is lossy. Once it's gone, it's gone. Yup. I usually bring them into Wavelab and use plugins to compensate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Dylan Walters Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 It sounds like you kept your cool and didn't insist on being 'right'. Good for you! You are right though; MP3 is a lossy compression format, end of story. Even if you convert an MP3 file back to WAV, it will be not be the same as the original, non-compressed file. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lee Flier Posted January 10, 2007 Members Share Posted January 10, 2007 LOL that's hilarious. Tell him to try zipping up a WAV or AIFF file (or a TIFF for that matter) and see how much smaller it gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 LOL that's hilarious. Tell him to try zipping up a WAV or AIFF file (or a TIFF for that matter) and see how much smaller it gets. And then he could take that ZIP file and convert it to an MP3, and then ZIP that, and then convert it to an MP3... eventually it will disappear completely. I think I just discovered the disposal solution for really bad music! PS Seriously, even the most knowledgeable cats get things wrong sometimes Ken... which means that the rest of us are REALLY in trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 11, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 It sounds like you kept your cool and didn't insist on being 'right'. Good for you! You are right though; MP3 is a lossy compression format, end of story. Even if you convert an MP3 file back to WAV, it will be not be the same as the original, non-compressed file. That's a hard lesson to learn, not arguing to "win a point". I used to do that until I was blue in the face. Now, I try just to make my point and try and end it there. I've found that if they don't listen when you have a regular discussion, they're typically just gonna dig their heels in if you keep arguing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 That's just bizarre. So -- I mean I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this -- what on earth did he think the difference between a 32 kbps mp3 and a 256 kbps mp3 was? That one is so compressed it's going to take a really long time to "uncompress" it back to full fidelity? I mean... that just defies credulity... how could someone -- an ME no less -- have SO LITTLE understanding of the basic realities of the technologies he's dealing with? Not to mention his complete misunderstanding of the JPEG format he used as an example -- I mean, it's not exactly a secret that it, too, is a lossy format driven by a perceptual encoding algorithm. But aside from the fact that his analogy was based on a false understanding of examples on both sides of the analogy, he's right on. Flabbergasting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EccentRick Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 That's a hard lesson to learn, not arguing to "win a point". I used to do that until I was blue in the face. Now, I try just to make my point and try and end it there. I've found that if they don't listen when you have a regular discussion, they're typically just gonna dig their heels in if you keep arguing. As former, longtime Speaker of the House of Representatives Sam Rayburn once put it: "No one has a finer command of language than the person who keeps his mouth shut." Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EccentRick Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 And then he could take that ZIP file and convert it to an MP3, and then ZIP that, and then convert it to an MP3... eventually it will disappear completely. I think I just discovered the disposal solution for really bad music! LOL Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members where02190 Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 Personally I'd like to know who this supposedly reputable ME is to ensure I NEVER RECOMMEND HIM TO ANYONE!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 11, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 Personally I'd like to know who this supposedly reputable ME is to ensure I NEVER RECOMMEND HIM TO ANYONE!!!!!!! I don't know how reputable he is as a mastering engineer...or a tracking engineer (I am not aware of any reputation he has, in other words). When mastering, he was doing everything in 16-bit exclusively in Alesis MasterLink. He is a good tracking/mixing engineer, at any rate. He simply happens to be the mastering engineer that my friend chose. I'm not much of a gear slut, despite what you might think, so I'm not familiar with specific model LA-2As, LA-3s, Pulteq-style EQs, and certainly not Fairchild-style levelers, but he had a fair collection of these and was telling me the specifics of these. Couldn't tell you whether he was correct or not, but he seemed to know a great deal of detail. And he seemed to be a very good "armchair psychologist" as well, making a lot of sense in his assessment of people and dynamics in their interaction. And to me, that's what made comments about the .jpgs and MP3s all the more bizarre. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Actually, he had another comment that I've been unable to successfully Google. He said that the U.S. has been based on consumerism from the start, and that the American Revolution was started, essentially, from shovels. According to him, one used to have to purchase shovels and other supplies from English stores. The shovels were made poorly, and even the spade was made of wood. A colonist started making one out of metal so it would last considerably longer, and other colonists bought from him in droves instead of the English shops. This caused a huge uproar, with the English demanding that their colonists purchase from their stores, and that this eventually ignited the American Revolution. I've not been able to find any reference to this so far. Anyone know about this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members russrags Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 I'll have to do my own tests on this ... if I ever get a chance. One thing I have noticed about MP3's is that if I'm dealing with an MP3 that has be over volume maximized ... it can be undone. Say I want to reduced the over all volume 5 dB, you would think a -5dB reduction would still keep the top and bottom just as flat as before, but I find that I can undo maximization and restore the file include all it's original peaks in the music. RussNashville Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 Do you think that he might have been talking about Mercantilism and the Navigation Acts? Did he look like this guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 I know you don't require more testimonial evidence to assuage your doubts, but the guy is completely wrong from a technical perspective. Not that it's worth the effort to let your ME pal know, but the very spec from Fraunhofer defines MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3 (MP3) as a lossy format! And as a graphics guy, the analogy to JPEG is perfectly accurate as well... also lossy. Describing JPEG and MP3 as if they're some kind of codec is wrong as wrong can be. Oh well! This {censored} does get confusing from time to time. - Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members steveg Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 MPEG 3 is a type of compression using an algorithm which determines what information it can drop and minimally affect the sound and is specific to sound and video files. You definitely DO lose audio information but the results can be quite good with high enough settings. The ZIP format is a general data compression algorithm that maintains an exact bit for bit copy of the original data. It looks at strings of data within the file(s) that it can represent in less data space and applies the algorithm to those pieces. When it is unzipped you have exactly the same data that went in. As a result, the ZIP file size can vary dramatically based on the content of the file(s) but no data is lost in the process. Don't be so hard on the engineer in the story, we can't all be experts in everything and not understanding something about data compression doesn't directly correlate to proper engineering and ability to create good sound! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pbognar Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 And then he could take that ZIP file and convert it to an MP3, and then ZIP that, and then convert it to an MP3... eventually it will disappear completely. I think I just discovered the disposal solution for really bad music! PS Seriously, even the most knowledgeable cats get things wrong sometimes Ken... which means that the rest of us are REALLY in trouble. That may be the funniest thing I've read on the forum in a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members philbo Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 That's a hard lesson to learn, not arguing to "win a point". I used to do that until I was blue in the face. Now, I try just to make my point and try and end it there. I've found that if they don't listen when you have a regular discussion, they're typically just gonna dig their heels in if you keep arguing. Yes - - being able to disagree amiably is a very valuable skill. Once you realize that what people think is much less important than what they do, it becomes a lot easier... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted January 11, 2007 Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 I'll have to do my own tests on this ... if I ever get a chance. One thing I have noticed about MP3's is that if I'm dealing with an MP3 that has be over volume maximized ... it can be undone. Say I want to reduced the over all volume 5 dB, you would think a -5dB reduction would still keep the top and bottom just as flat as before, but I find that I can undo maximization and restore the file include all it's original peaks in the music. Russ Nashville With the UNDO command, maybe. __________ BTW... speaking of extraordinarily boneheaded misunderstanding of the basic technologies many or most of us use: http://gearslutz.com/board/showthread.php?t=102626 [snip]...I am trying to get the MP3 file size down but still maintain reasonable audio quality. On the master buss, I am compressing the compilation with a Waves SSL compressor, then into Ozone to compress even further, and finally into a Waves L1. The file size is still a little too big. Wondered if anyone had some ideas or experience getting good results.... [snip] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 11, 2007 Author Members Share Posted January 11, 2007 Don't be so hard on the engineer in the story, we can't all be experts in everything and not understanding something about data compression doesn't directly correlate to proper engineering and ability to create good sound!Steve I was more taken aback that he was so vehement in this assertion despite proof to the contrary. But yes, I just let that stuff go. He's a good tracking and mixing engineer, and is quite good at Armchair Psychology, and was engaging to talk to, so yes, no worries there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.