Recording from inside a parked car of rain falling on the roof. The carwas parked under a large tree resulting in very large drops hitting theroof & creating loud impacts with a slight metal resonance from theroof.
"Finally, since a 192kbps mp3 is damn good quality anyway why not just use that as the smaller dowload?"
"44.1KHz PCM is lossy already"
Just because you have Pro Tools, doesn't mean you know what you are talking about! If you did you would realize that anything above 16kHz in an mp3 is mono! Mp3 technology is based on masking and the fact that the ear can't hear certain frequencies so why should we need them. The high end sucks and the low end is very muddy. If you listen to hi hats, cymbals, etc you will notice they sound terrible and washed out. The only way to prove this to you is to tell you to take one of your cd's(if you own any) and A/B it with an mp3 of the exact same song. You will be blown awayby the difference, I guarantee it! The only reason that mp3's are good is because they are a smaller file size and they are convenient. Not to mention the internet helped them out a little. It doesn't matter how many kbps, it is still a lossy format! Meaning you lose information (High end Low end).
This is why you have to pay for the mp3 option in pro tools! Because noone uses it!Also 44.1kHz 16bit is the highest sample/bit rate that a compact disc can support... unless it is HD which can support 20bit. Do you mean lossless in comparison to reality or things Like DVD audio 48kHz 24bit? Next time, get some sleep and please do your research before you decide to post any useless information!
Great recording! And thanks for having it in FLAC, which is pretty much standard these days, no matter what captainswingarm sez. :-)
urm, theres these things called converters....where you can convert files to mp3, wave or whatever you want....so why does this even matter?
do a google search on dbpoweramp, it might come in handy more than once being on this site!
o and pro-tools is late :P (poke poke)
can we please move this thread over tohttp://freesound.iua.upf.edu/forum/viewtopic.php?t=719
OK, so I admit to not having looked at the specs before having a rant I was tired late at night and the sample I needed was a hassle to use - it's not another lossy codec - but that wasn't actually the point of my rant: Firstly, 44.1KHz PCM is lossy already and seondly that the reduction of data by .flac is not that much greater than a .wav zipped up. .flac like a zip for PCM audio. It produces sample-perfect reproductions with a reduced overall data bulk. It's essentially like running an audio file straight from a zip. But the reduction is only a few percent more than zipping it anyway - so what's the point? There's tons or archiving software around that everyone has, using the .zip formats and others. Why introduce another to squash a 10Mb file down to 7Mb instead of 8Mb. And as it's still got to be converted into a useable format for mainstream audio software I really don't see the point. Finally, since a 192kbps mp3 is damn good quality anyway why not just use that as the smaller dowload? I don't see the point in having this third format that is basically just a zip, but requires extra software to decode it witha minimal storage gain. Basically there reason for this rant is that as a pro-tools user, PT steal all the hardware resources. To previes tracks in freesound I have to quit Pro-Tools, so what I do is dowload a lot of files then audtion them in Pro-Tools. I can't do this with .flacs - I have to close my session, open up some third sound editor just for that purpose and voncert them, whereas I could unzip them straight from the PT dialogue. If there was a decoder for .flac that would decrypt the data into the folder from the right-click menu and thus in my PT dialogue then I would have no problem with it.
|  21 comments
Please log in to comment
920 x 245
481 x 86
375 x 30
For more information check out our cookies policy.