Wave Files vs. MP3's

bryanbailey wrote on 2/17/2002, 12:52 AM
People on this site and others keep telling me that wave files are better than mp3's.
I've used wave files and mp3's. I've listened to both and the mp3's simply sound better. They may not sound that much better but they do sound BETTER.
I used wave files in the past because I was using CD Architect in Sound Forge 4.5 to burn CD's. This meant that I had to convert my mp3's into wave files to use in CD Architect. This took a long time and I hated doing it. I later realized that I could burn mp3's using Nero Burning ROM. One day I listened to a wave file and then an mp3 after it. The waves kind of sound like shit compared to the mp3's, especially if the mp3 is 320kpbs.
I think that the waves sound worse because they were converted from mp3's. But no one shares those original, (better sounding) LONG wave files on the internet so I guess I'm stuck with mp3's. So please explain to me again how mp3's are not as good as wave files when burning them to a CD...

Comments

PipelineAudio wrote on 2/17/2002, 12:53 AM
Ladies and gentelmen, for those new to the art of FlameWarrior hood, THIS post is a " Troll "
bryanbailey wrote on 2/17/2002, 1:20 AM
Is something wrong with what I said.
bryanbailey wrote on 2/17/2002, 1:23 AM
I'm just really confused about it. I'm not saying I'm right. I just need some explaination. I'm not here to say anyone is telling me lies. Sure maybe I am a "troll", but I can at least get an answer. That's all I'm looking for.
Cheesehole wrote on 2/17/2002, 1:43 AM
good eye Pipeline... let's see how many more take the bait ;)

(he's already got me and you posting... heheh :D
bryanbailey wrote on 2/17/2002, 2:29 AM
"good eye Pipeline... let's see how many more take the bait"

What is that supposed to mean, please tell me. Do you not like what I wrote when you said that this post is a "troll". If I said something stupid, please tell me, I can learn from my mistake. I say a lot of stupid things, that's just me. I'm sorry if I did.
nlamartina wrote on 2/17/2002, 3:48 AM
Bryan,

Although I snickered at the original post a bit, I feel you deserve an answer:

When a WAV file is converted to an MP3 format, the encoder gate filters (ie, throws away) all information from 16,000 Hz and up. There are a couple more things done too, but that's where a lot of the free space comes from. This is why we found your post humorous. Technically speaking, it would be IMPOSSIBLE for an MP3 to sound better than an original WAV file, since the WAV file contains about 25% more “sound”. Granted, it's mostly overtone stuff that many people can't even hear, but it still contributes to the overall fidelity. Additionally, when you convert an MP3 to WAV, all you're doing is decompressing the file. The information will be the exact same, so again, it'd be impossible for the MP3 to sound better. Are you playing you MP3's through a DSP, like DFX or SRS? That would make them sound "better", perhaps. Try playing MP3's and WAV counterparts side by side in Sound Forge to see if you still hear the same thing.

Overall Bryan, you've got to understand that MP3's have absolutely no advantage over WAV files in terms of their fidelity. It's kinda like taking a stereo recording, converting it to mono, and then saying it sounds better that way. Or like reading a 100-page book, then cutting out 25 pages, reading it again, and saying you like the second version better. I don't know, maybe to you it does. Maybe you're hypersensitive to frequency's about 16 kHz. Or maybe something's in your ear. I don't know.

Regards,
Nick LaMartina
bryanbailey wrote on 2/17/2002, 12:49 PM
It probably was my ear... I went into Vegas Video 3.0 (which is awesome by the way) and converted an mp3 into a wav and they do sound exactly the same. Maybe it was my imagination before, but for some reason the waves used to sound worse. But that was maybe 6 months ago when I last listened to a wave file on my computer. Now, I have a better picture of the situation and I'm glad you replied because I was going nuts over this. thanks.
bryanbailey wrote on 2/17/2002, 1:25 PM
This might be another stupid question: Is WAV the highest quality format to burn onto a CD? Is there anything better out there right now? I'd like to know.
nlamartina wrote on 2/17/2002, 1:55 PM
Bryan,

Yes, WAV is the best format for CD use. It's an uncompressed format, meaning it's the truest representation of sound in a digital format. Any compressed format you work with will only start throwing data away. For this reason, all professional recording software uses WAV as its native format when recording.

Hope this helps,
Nick LaMartina
bryanbailey wrote on 2/17/2002, 2:54 PM
That's cool to me. Thanks