Seperating one big MP3

Sinster

OSNN Senior Addict
Joined
8 Dec 2001
Messages
520
into individual tracks. How do I go about doing? All 17 tracks is one big MP3 how do I seperate them into individual tracks?
 
Did a Google search and found this:
MP3 Recorder & Editor
Might help.
smile.gif
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
i use musicutter
 

Attachments

  • musiCutter0.7.1.zip
    352.4 KB · Views: 39
Two words : Adobe Audition - Formerly Cool Edit.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
dreamliner77 said:
1) You only have to satisfy your ears, so I guess if it sounds ok to you, then it's all good.

true, unless you're putting stuff out for the masses.
 
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.
 
I cut 5 min trackmarks into a mliveset mp3 using a cue sheet and burnt it to CD.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest profile posts

Also Hi EP and people. I found this place again while looking through a oooollllllldddd backup. I have filled over 10TB and was looking at my collection of antiques. Any bids on the 500Mhz Win 95 fix?
Any of the SP crew still out there?
Xie wrote on Electronic Punk's profile.
Impressed you have kept this alive this long EP! So many sites have come and gone. :(

Just did some crude math and I apparently joined almost 18yrs ago, how is that possible???
hello peeps... is been some time since i last came here.
Electronic Punk wrote on Sazar's profile.
Rest in peace my friend, been trying to find you and finally did in the worst way imaginable.

Forum statistics

Threads
62,015
Messages
673,494
Members
5,621
Latest member
naeemsafi
Back