from wave to mp3. Too much high frenquencies. Using RNP

I just an RNP and I'm using to record my guitar cab with heavy distortion.

When I listen to my recording through Sonar, the sound is smooth. When I export the fille to mp3 128kbps, the mp3 file has too much high end and the distortion sounds buzzy rather than smooth.

Does the compression of the mp3 file cause it enhance the high and low end?

Any way to produce my mixes without having to export to mp3 every time I make a change to listen to it?

A lot depends on the bit rate (Bits Per Second) setting of your MP3 encoder. If it is less than 192K, the sound will get chewed up. Especially stuff with a high slew rate (like distorto guitars) and high freqs (ditto).

If your encoder does not offer options for this, go find and download RazorLAME, which is free and considered by some to be the best MP3 encoder out there. Then save your tune as a WAV file, and let RazorLAME convert it to MP3.

Your music should sound great in a 24 bit wave file, so don't compromise your mixing for the sake of crappy mp3 playback.

Anything that distorts a waveform adds harmonics - which is why a crappy mp3 sounds brighter and harsher. So look at your mp3 conversion settings, because they are probably doing to much damage.

I do the encoding using LAME implemented into Sonar.

Some sites only host if they are 128kbps encoded. For my own listening, I never go below 192 kbps.

Why not use variable bit rate (VBR) encoding?

Don't listen to them as MP3's, mix down to 24 bit wav or aiff files.

a couple of thoughts -

Are you monitoring them on the same speakers?

Have you switched on any automatic "normalizing" options?

Try converting the mp3 back to wav and compare the frequency spectrum to the original. You can use something like Inspector or Voxengo Span plugins if your editor doesn't have a spectral tool. Look to see where the energy is distributed differently between the wav file that sounds right and the mp3.

This would be a complete waste of time, as this will not return the MP3 to the original .wav file state, or anything even closely resembling it. Once converted the damage is done and permanent.

It's different, that's true. But he needs more information.

What he needs is to stop trying to critical listen to his mixes on the {censored}tiest format on the planet.

Well, you know that's right.

But this post made me think he must have a real good reason to encode mp3.

All well for posting up on the web, but for critical listening there is absolutely no reason to be mixing to MP3 format.

Really? How interesting.... So, tell me, how do you do listening tests to master your music for MP3 distribution?

My point (well, several):

1) MP3s are way better than cassette tape ever was on it's best day. Yet, somehow, a number of people bought music in that format... and much worse formats... (8 track cartridges, anyone?)

2) The poster has a valid question - - much of music marketing, whether you like it or not, uses compressed formats.

If you had the choice of living in perfect sonic fidelity in your basement with no outside exposure to your music, or getting a compressed version of your music out to 50000 listeners, it is of course only your own business that you might choose the basement rather than give up one iota of fidelity. But you can't expect everyone else to make that same decision.... (I'm not really trying to put words in your mouth, I'm just extrapolating to make the point).

3) There are a number of mastering techniques that can be used to optimize a mix for MP3 format. Anyone who ships music in that format should know them. Since I went from tape to DAW in 2000, every single client through my studio has requested an MP3 mixes along with their red book audio CDs. No exceptions, so far... it's all about the marketing, baby. If you don't get it up on the web, you have no chance.