• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Seperating one big MP3

ApparitionX

Sick of it all.
#5
personally I use soundforge for that sort of thing, u can take almost any type of audio file, insert markers wherever you want, and then save it as almost any type of audio you want, or just burn a track at once cd straight from there.
oh yeah, u have to convert the markers to regions first, but it's just a one click operation somkewhere in tools.
 

dreamliner77

The Analog Kid
#6
ApparitionX said:
personally I use soundforge for that sort of thing, u can take almost any type of audio file, insert markers wherever you want, and then save it as almost any type of audio you want, or just burn a track at once cd straight from there.
oh yeah, u have to convert the markers to regions first, but it's just a one click operation somkewhere in tools.

The problem with that is that if you want to store it as mp3, you have to re-encode it. This is called transcoding and you lose a lot of quality. mp3directcut works directly on teh mp3 file.
 

ApparitionX

Sick of it all.
#7
what are you talking about? With soundforge you can take almost any audio format from just about any source and save it as whatever audio format you choose. you just go to save as and select mp3 from the drop down list. once it's saved as an mp3, it's an mp3.
 

dreamliner77

The Analog Kid
#8
ApparitionX said:
what are you talking about? With soundforge you can take almost any audio format from just about any source and save it as whatever audio format you choose. you just go to save as and select mp3 from the drop down list. once it's saved as an mp3, it's an mp3.
If you open up a mp3 in soundforge, it has to decode it to .wav. SoundForge is a Wave Editor. The wav is exactly the decoded mp3. If you then try to save this as mp3, you have to recompress the wav. This will make a substantially worse sounding mp3 than the original mp3. This is a process called transcoding. Your best option is to edit the mp3 in an editor that does not have to decode the mp3. Most common are mp3directcut or Cool Edit Pro (Adobe Audition) using the LAME mp3 filter.

If you don't believe me, take an mp3, decode to wave, then reencode it to mp3. Compare this to the original mp3.

More proof: Take the same mp3, decode to wav, reencode, decode. Do this 4 or 5 times and you'll see just how bad it can get.

If you must decode to wave to edit, you are best saving in a different compressed format such as ogg or mpc because they use different methods to obtain bitrate savings.
 

Kush

High On Life!
#11
musicutter isnt eye candy but its small and get the job done well, just my two cents, havent tried many others, u can burn the mp3 also if u have the cue sheet
 

ApparitionX

Sick of it all.
#12
dreamliner77 said:
If you open up a mp3 in soundforge, it has to decode it to .wav. SoundForge is a Wave Editor. The wav is exactly the decoded mp3. If you then try to save this as mp3, you have to recompress the wav. This will make a substantially worse sounding mp3 than the original mp3. This is a process called transcoding. Your best option is to edit the mp3 in an editor that does not have to decode the mp3. Most common are mp3directcut or Cool Edit Pro (Adobe Audition) using the LAME mp3 filter.

If you don't believe me, take an mp3, decode to wave, then reencode it to mp3. Compare this to the original mp3.

More proof: Take the same mp3, decode to wav, reencode, decode. Do this 4 or 5 times and you'll see just how bad it can get.

If you must decode to wave to edit, you are best saving in a different compressed format such as ogg or mpc because they use different methods to obtain bitrate savings.
well, I spent some time over the last few days experimenting with some of the above mentioned progs, and honestly, I think soundforge maintained the integrity of the original mp3's MUCH better than anything else I tried. Wave editor, the transcoding proccess, no argument, but end result?...I'm sorry DL77, but I hafta go with SF.
 
#13
You can't maintain the "integrity" of the original mp3. You can have a close approximation, just like the first time you encode from cd and have a close approximation of the original cd/wave file. I recommend if you are using soundforge, to save the file as wave and then use the LAME encoder to encode to mp3. Much higher quality than the encoder in soundforge.
 

ApparitionX

Sick of it all.
#14
ok, whatever. bottom line is (in my opinion) that the end result from soundforge sounded considerably better than the end result from any of the above mentioned progs I tried.
Besides, if you really want good quality audio, you aren't going to use mp3's anyway, (exepct when neccesary) because they sound like crap compared to wave files.
 
#15
1) You only have to satisfy your ears, so I guess if it sounds ok to you, then it's all good.



ApparitionX said:
if you really want good quality audio, you aren't going to use mp3's anyway, (exepct when neccesary) because they sound like crap compared to wave files.
MP3 done correctly does not sound like crap. Using the
LAME encoder with the --alt-preset standard command line, I guarantee that you cannot ABX an original .wav from the resultant .mp3
 

ApparitionX

Sick of it all.
#16
they sound like crap compared to wavs no matter what encoder you use. I am familiar with the lame encoder, the alt-preset standard command, and their proper use, and I'm sorry dude, but I gotta disagree. Mp3's are NOT up to par for professional audio quality. Call the most reputable digital recording studio in your area, and ask them about which audio format they PREFER for overall quality, whatever they tell you, they will not say mp3. If they do, then they aren't really a very good, professional studio.
BTW, the ABX thread was a nice find though..good readin, thanx.
 
#18
ApparitionX said:
they sound like crap compared to wavs no matter what encoder you use. I am familiar with the lame encoder, the alt-preset standard command, and their proper use, and I'm sorry dude, but I gotta disagree. Mp3's are NOT up to par for professional audio quality. Call the most reputable digital recording studio in your area, and ask them about which audio format they PREFER for overall quality, whatever they tell you, they will not say mp3. If they do, then they aren't really a very good, professional studio.
BTW, the ABX thread was a nice find though..good readin, thanx.
Do an ABX test. I bet you'd be suprised. BTW, I am an audio engineer by trade and work at a few different local studios. First of all, a studio would never use a compressed format. Hell, for a studio, 16bit/44.1kHz is a compressed format.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Hello, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me ...
Xie
What a long strange trip it's been. =)

Forum statistics

Threads
61,961
Messages
673,239
Members
89,016
Latest member
poordown814