Top Dj's using mp3's or what?

Home :: General Discussion :: Top Dj's using mp3's or what?Reply
Top Dj's using mp3's or what?
Posted on: 16.09.2012 by Samatha Bohin
Hey,

This is something that has been puzzling me for a while and as I can't find any information online I thought I'd hear your thoughts on the issue.

I really like 'Hardwells Tomorrowland 2012' performance, especially how he incorporated remixes of more 'popular' chart music. My concern is, when I try to find the tracks, there free to download 'niche' less popular songs on SoundCloud etc which people have remixed, of which are only available to download in mp3 format (320 kpbs). There not available on BeatPort or any form of music selling website.

Now, as a DJ, I hear endless times to mix with ONLY .wav formats apposed to compressed mp3's which of course, .wav is uncompressed and 'better'. And that got me believeing, how is Hardwell (and no doubt many other top 100 dj's) using mp3's and getting away with it at HUGE venues with surly massively expensive and high end speakers?

I'm pretty sure there not finding a wav version (quote me if I'm wrong) as I can't find one and also many 'remixes' of popular chart music, use mp3 versions of the original song to start with.

It's annoying me because I'm finding great mixes that I want to use in set's but then are held back by mp3 only versions. Especially as I buy all my music as wav (same price for me as mp3)

Would love to hear your thoughts on the issue.

Thanks
Latoria Kavulich
18.09.2012
Originally Posted by loverocket
I heard that Tony Robbins can actually distinguish between WAV and 320K.

PLEASE CLOSE THIS THREAD. PLEAAASSSEEEE !!!

>
okies
Lashawn Maycock
18.09.2012
Originally Posted by deevey
*But Chuck Norris definitely can
and I bet Geoff Capes can too.... (exits thread)....
Jerica Salava
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by deevey
LIES

Yeah. I know Chuck can. I believe Tony is lying too.
>







*But Chuck Norris definitely can
Very true.
Rolanda Clodfelder
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by loverocket
I heard that Tony Robbins can actually distinguish between WAV and 320K.
LIES








*But Chuck Norris definitely can
Cole Maroto
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by UncleFunky
The difference between lossy and lossless is clearly audible, don't doubt it.
i doubt it. in fact, i highly doubt it. now what?

i would be willing to wager my set of technics to anyone on here who could blindly and accurately distinguish between proper 320 mp3s and wav files 100% of the time, running 10-15 songs 2 times over. if you miss one it's done and you have to give me $200. if it's clearly audible it should be easy, yeah?

lol, that should be the next djtt comp: who can guess the most correctly in the wav vs mp3 debate? put up 10 random songs, each with a proper 320 mp3 and wav and let's get down to it so we can nail this coffin shut already. anyone who gets over 90% would go onto the second or maybe 3rd heat to rule out variance.
Jessi Therkildsen
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by samso11
Now, as a DJ, I hear endless times to mix with ONLY .wav formats apposed to compressed mp3's which of course, .wav is uncompressed and 'better'. And that got me believeing, how is Hardwell (and no doubt many other top 100 dj's) using mp3's and getting away with it at HUGE venues with surly massively expensive and high end speakers?
Those people that tell you that have no idea what they are talking about. If it is a well produced/mastered/encoded MP3 it will sound amazing on a big sound system. Pretty much all deejays, big and small, primarily use 320 kbps MP3s.


Originally Posted by fullenglishpint
Generally a 320kbps mp3 is virtually indistinguishable from a WAV. Pretty much every DJ uses them, and I'd wager no one could tell the difference on any club system.
Exactly.
Roseanna Signorini
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by soundinmotiondj
I mentally replace "audiophile" with "complete moron". From there, I don't need to change anything else that is said for it to make sense to me. "...why, yes, after hearing all that, you are in fact a 'complete moron'..."
from now on, audiophile will be known as audiomoron....
Layne Koop
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by dj matt blaze
A few months ago Mostopha put togethe a double blind test between wav and 320 mp3 and some of us did it. 10 tracks, 15 sec clips, to get aclimated to what we were hearing first the mp3 was played 2x and then the wav 2x and then each track played 10x at random between mp3 or wav and you had to pick which it was. I got like 55% right I believe, something like that. Most others had the same result or worse.
That was a great test. I took it, but did not submit the results. I actually took it three times. My results on the "10 random tracks" varied time to time....so in the end I did worse than "guessing".

Originally Posted by dj matt blaze
Venue sound systems are for loudness, not for technical acoustics.
And we have a winner. By far the largest effect of a "big system" is "high(er) SPL." Looking at the Equal Loudness Curve shows that the human perception of frequency response changes as the sound changes overall SPL. This is by far the largest effect of a "big system" compared to your home studio system. The next effects tend to come from the room setup, mono through all the tops, subs are hidden somewhere, etc.

If you want "fidelity", then a pair of reasonable headphones in a really quiet room are the "best" overall listening environment. Moving into a warehouse size space, with a 65-70dB noise floor from the HVAC and utilities, playing sound through 4 dozen speakers at >110dB peaks is NOT ever going to provide the highest fidelity and clarity to the user. In most cases, clubs are a firm step sideways from blasting music in your car at highway speeds. While there might be a strong emotional reaction to the music...it is never going to be a high fidelity listening environment.

Louder is not better. Louder is louder, and in almost every possible way, worse for critically listening to music.

Originally Posted by dj matt blaze
not the average person or the so called audiophile
I mentally replace "audiophile" with "complete moron". From there, I don't need to change anything else that is said for it to make sense to me. "...why, yes, after hearing all that, you are in fact a 'complete moron'..."
Lashawn Maycock
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by Zer0beet
320kbps is just as good as wav.
But surely if Hardwell messaged you on SoundCloud asking for your song in wav format for a show, you'd get it to him right quick
Personally I'd rather knock one out using sandpaper than give Hardwell a track, mind you it's all personal taste I suppose, just can't stand his (and others) music style, so avoid.

Any way re MP3's, if WAV available then buy if not 320kbps MP3 will be fine also. It's been well debated, personally most of my collection is 320kbps MP3 files which sound fine on the systems I play out on. In terms of my production I always output high quality, uncompressed audio for playing out.
Stanley Topoleski
16.09.2012
Originally Posted by Zer0beet
320kbps is just as good as wav.
But surely if Hardwell messaged you on SoundCloud asking for your song in wav format for a show, you'd get it to him right quick
this ^
Latoria Kavulich
18.09.2012
Originally Posted by loverocket
I heard that Tony Robbins can actually distinguish between WAV and 320K.

PLEASE CLOSE THIS THREAD. PLEAAASSSEEEE !!!

>
okies
Lashawn Maycock
18.09.2012
Originally Posted by deevey
*But Chuck Norris definitely can
and I bet Geoff Capes can too.... (exits thread)....
Jerica Salava
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by deevey
LIES

Yeah. I know Chuck can. I believe Tony is lying too.
>







*But Chuck Norris definitely can
Very true.
Audrey Pinda
17.09.2012		Whatever makes you happy.

Mp3's will save you money, and 99.99% of people won't give you shit about it. Some DJ's like to say they only use .WAV files and feel proud about it. If that's you, all the power. For me? If it's not an audio quality concern, then it's not an issue. Anything less than 320k is no good though.

The ones that do give you an issue over it? Just tell them to go listen to vinyl. If you're playing/listening digitally, no need to get into pissing contests over shit you can't tell the difference of.
Rolanda Clodfelder
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by loverocket
I heard that Tony Robbins can actually distinguish between WAV and 320K.
LIES








*But Chuck Norris definitely can
Jerica Salava
17.09.2012		I heard that Tony Robbins can actually distinguish between WAV and 320K.

PLEASE CLOSE THIS THREAD. PLEAAASSSEEEE !!!

>
Cole Maroto
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by UncleFunky
The difference between lossy and lossless is clearly audible, don't doubt it.
i doubt it. in fact, i highly doubt it. now what?

i would be willing to wager my set of technics to anyone on here who could blindly and accurately distinguish between proper 320 mp3s and wav files 100% of the time, running 10-15 songs 2 times over. if you miss one it's done and you have to give me $200. if it's clearly audible it should be easy, yeah?

lol, that should be the next djtt comp: who can guess the most correctly in the wav vs mp3 debate? put up 10 random songs, each with a proper 320 mp3 and wav and let's get down to it so we can nail this coffin shut already. anyone who gets over 90% would go onto the second or maybe 3rd heat to rule out variance.
Germaine Bernadin
17.09.2012		Its all good. I have played MP3 out once or twice in a very, very big club in Berlin.......... and it sounded really good.
Jessi Therkildsen
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by samso11
Now, as a DJ, I hear endless times to mix with ONLY .wav formats apposed to compressed mp3's which of course, .wav is uncompressed and 'better'. And that got me believeing, how is Hardwell (and no doubt many other top 100 dj's) using mp3's and getting away with it at HUGE venues with surly massively expensive and high end speakers?
Those people that tell you that have no idea what they are talking about. If it is a well produced/mastered/encoded MP3 it will sound amazing on a big sound system. Pretty much all deejays, big and small, primarily use 320 kbps MP3s.


Originally Posted by fullenglishpint
Generally a 320kbps mp3 is virtually indistinguishable from a WAV. Pretty much every DJ uses them, and I'd wager no one could tell the difference on any club system.
Exactly.
Desire Piedmont
17.09.2012		FLAC is the way to go. I make my own from physical sources.

I won't pay the same or more for a WAV file that I would pay for a physical copy but that's what is charged. So I buy 320 mp3s but I'm pissed when I do.

The difference between lossy and lossless is clearly audible, don't doubt it.
Ciara Cuttill
17.09.2012		"do what grooves, the people will listen to what moves" ... that's my motto oh and yea, I play out with 320 and occassionally the .wav ... im pretty sure the drunk and drugged up people dancing could give a rat's arse. (And I have played in hollywood's top clubs with funktion-one and other top notch systems). MOST PEOPLE DON'T CARE, and if they do, I'm not catering to that one"audiomoron" that is badmouthing every track the dj plays.
Roseanna Signorini
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by soundinmotiondj
I mentally replace "audiophile" with "complete moron". From there, I don't need to change anything else that is said for it to make sense to me. "...why, yes, after hearing all that, you are in fact a 'complete moron'..."
from now on, audiophile will be known as audiomoron....
Layne Koop
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by dj matt blaze
A few months ago Mostopha put togethe a double blind test between wav and 320 mp3 and some of us did it. 10 tracks, 15 sec clips, to get aclimated to what we were hearing first the mp3 was played 2x and then the wav 2x and then each track played 10x at random between mp3 or wav and you had to pick which it was. I got like 55% right I believe, something like that. Most others had the same result or worse.
That was a great test. I took it, but did not submit the results. I actually took it three times. My results on the "10 random tracks" varied time to time....so in the end I did worse than "guessing".

Originally Posted by dj matt blaze
Venue sound systems are for loudness, not for technical acoustics.
And we have a winner. By far the largest effect of a "big system" is "high(er) SPL." Looking at the Equal Loudness Curve shows that the human perception of frequency response changes as the sound changes overall SPL. This is by far the largest effect of a "big system" compared to your home studio system. The next effects tend to come from the room setup, mono through all the tops, subs are hidden somewhere, etc.

If you want "fidelity", then a pair of reasonable headphones in a really quiet room are the "best" overall listening environment. Moving into a warehouse size space, with a 65-70dB noise floor from the HVAC and utilities, playing sound through 4 dozen speakers at >110dB peaks is NOT ever going to provide the highest fidelity and clarity to the user. In most cases, clubs are a firm step sideways from blasting music in your car at highway speeds. While there might be a strong emotional reaction to the music...it is never going to be a high fidelity listening environment.

Louder is not better. Louder is louder, and in almost every possible way, worse for critically listening to music.

Originally Posted by dj matt blaze
not the average person or the so called audiophile
I mentally replace "audiophile" with "complete moron". From there, I don't need to change anything else that is said for it to make sense to me. "...why, yes, after hearing all that, you are in fact a 'complete moron'..."
Latoria Kavulich
17.09.2012		*yawn
Edwardo Rothenberger
17.09.2012		I believe all community s should ban debates on such topics.

They never go anywhere.

I just can't hold back from posting sometimes
Lashawn Maycock
17.09.2012
Originally Posted by Zer0beet
320kbps is just as good as wav.
But surely if Hardwell messaged you on SoundCloud asking for your song in wav format for a show, you'd get it to him right quick
Personally I'd rather knock one out using sandpaper than give Hardwell a track, mind you it's all personal taste I suppose, just can't stand his (and others) music style, so avoid.

Any way re MP3's, if WAV available then buy if not 320kbps MP3 will be fine also. It's been well debated, personally most of my collection is 320kbps MP3 files which sound fine on the systems I play out on. In terms of my production I always output high quality, uncompressed audio for playing out.
Stanley Topoleski
16.09.2012
Originally Posted by Zer0beet
320kbps is just as good as wav.
But surely if Hardwell messaged you on SoundCloud asking for your song in wav format for a show, you'd get it to him right quick
this ^
Benjamin Sieh
16.09.2012		320kbps is just as good as wav.
But surely if Hardwell messaged you on SoundCloud asking for your song in wav format for a show, you'd get it to him right quick
Margie Pavell
16.09.2012
Originally Posted by Timbo21
Well, I worked in the top studios in London from recording & mixing through to vinyl cutting & CD Mastering for 22 years, working with many many top artists and producers, and I say you absolutely don't know what you're talking about
you need to put "club environment" into your brain...
Ming Devis
16.09.2012		320 mp3's sound great. Until the price of lossless files are equal and storage costs get allot cheaper I will use mp3. Id say 90% of professional DJ's use 320mp3 as well.
Stanley Topoleski
16.09.2012
Originally Posted by Timbo21
Well, I worked in the top studios in London from recording & mixing through to vinyl cutting & CD Mastering for 22 years, working with many many top artists and producers, and I say you absolutely don't know what you're talking about
lol exuse the typo. i meant to say the untrained ear.
Celine Surico
16.09.2012
Originally Posted by Timbo21
Well, I worked in the top studios in London from recording & mixing through to vinyl cutting & CD Mastering for 22 years, working with many many top artists and producers, and I say you absolutely don't know what you're talking about
Yep. I believe someone needs to train their ears. Does not mean that the MP3 quality is crap in all instances, but you could hear differences. Assume you have decent to good reference monitors, of course. Or good headphones. Actually I recommend training to hear such differences as it helps when you do mixing and possible final mastering.
Tatum Ansaldo
16.09.2012		Should have guessed this would turn into a shitstorm.
Leeanna Ayla
16.09.2012		I'm bored
Jonas Hanway
16.09.2012		99% of the tracks I use week in week out are mp3.

Sorry, but in my opinion in a festival/club/bar environment. Who is honestly going to sit there and go... "I do believe this DJ is using mp3 instead of WAV, he clearly is garbage" Nobody.

If you want to go and spend that little extra buying WAV's everytime.. By all means, be my guest but when it comes down to it.. Nobody is going to notice either way what kind of format your file is in.. Unless you're using mp3's under 128.
Roseanna Signorini
16.09.2012
Originally Posted by Timbo21
Well, I worked in the top studios in London from recording & mixing through to vinyl cutting & CD Mastering for 22 years, working with many many top artists and producers, and I say you absolutely don't know what you're talking about
Ask any recording engineer if they sat there for an hour tweaking and twisting knobs to get the sound as perfectly as possible and when they believe they have it just right, they look over and the signal isn't even going through any processor. If you have been in the biz for 22 years you know exactly what I'm talking about, your mind plays tricks on you...again the human ear can not tell the difference, search for the old thread and do the test, you'll see.
Roseanna Signorini
16.09.2012		This subject comes up at least once a month. Yes, wav is technically a better file. The sound quality between a wav and a 320 mp3 on any system is practically impossible to tell. You can tell me until you are blue in the face that you can hear the difference and I will tell you that your mind is playing tricks on you. MP3 removes the frequencies that the human ear can't hear. There are the elitist snibby DJs who have to have what they believe is the top of the line in everything but the fact is you can not tell the difference.

A few months ago Mostopha put togethe a double blind test between wav and 320 mp3 and some of us did it. 10 tracks, 15 sec clips, to get aclimated to what we were hearing first the mp3 was played 2x and then the wav 2x and then each track played 10x at random between mp3 or wav and you had to pick which it was. I got like 55% right I believe, something like that. Most others had the same result or worse. Mostopha was the only 1 that got like 80% right. He did admit that he didn't realize how close it really is and he couldn't do it without the A/B format of the test meaning if I played a track and said tell me if its an mp3 or a wav, he couldn't do it. He also admited that without knowing the music as well as he did he most likely wouldn't have scored as high. Venue sound systems are for loudness, not for technical acoustics.

Again, all the so called loss of bass, high end, sounds tinny or empty is all what we percieve mp3 to sound like because we know that technically its an inferior format so we believe we hear a difference, I know its inferior therefore I can tell, but the reality is, I could play 320 mp3 all evening long and sas its a wav and no one would know, not the average person or the so called audiophile, so unless you walk around with an oscilliscope to look at the sound wave, your ears can't tell.
Edwardo Rothenberger
16.09.2012
Originally Posted by calgarc
the trained ear can barely tell the difference between 320 mp3 and wav files.
Well, I worked in the top studios in London from recording & mixing through to vinyl cutting & CD Mastering for 22 years, working with many many top artists and producers, and I say you absolutely don't know what you're talking about
Stanley Topoleski
16.09.2012		the trained ear can barely tell the difference between 320 mp3 and wav files.
Edwardo Rothenberger
16.09.2012		Many are so deaf to sound quality.

Some tracks, esp dance can get away with 320 not sounding that different to wav. Converting wav to 320 can lose a lot, definition of bass, you get mushy top end.

I've heard many very good name Dj's overdrive sound systems so they are being overdriven just so they could be louder. It would sound atrocious.

My point is that many Dj's have talents in many areas of production & music, but many really lack a good ear for sound quality, whether its due to them smashing their hearing with loud headphone monitoring or just that they lack the ability to discern the difference.

<< Back to General DiscussionReply
  • Page:
  • 1
  • 2
  • >>
  • Total: 47

Copyright 2012-2023
DJRANKINGS.ORG n.g.o.
Chuo-ku, Osaka, Japan

Created by Ajaxel CMS

Terms & Privacy