WATCH ALL STUDIO ONE WITH JOE GILDER VIDEOS: • Studio One with Joe Gi... STUDIO ONE: www.presonus.com/products/Stu... PRESONUS SHOP: shop.presonus.com/software/So... #StudioOneWithJoeGilder
You don't understand how much this just helped me out!!!!!! Like just the click of some buttons turned my mixes and master sessions to another level, been doing it so wrong for so long.smh. thank you!!
Hey Joe, even though I've been making music and engineering my own stuff for almost 40 years, I still consider myself in the "first grade" as an engineer. You have helped me graduate to the 2nd grade with your tutorials but this one - wow - I've been mystified and literally dying a thousand deaths with every master thinking I just suck! Well, now, I suck a lot less thanks to you and this tutorial. Literally, this 6:47 has changed my life and the future of my stomach (and ears). Why did I not know this?! Thank you for all that you teach us - especially those like me, still stuck in elementary school. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Your fan(and student), robby
When you export your master wav file (to be later converted to mp3 by streaming services, bandcamp etc. make sure to keep around 1.5db of headroom as some codecs clip when converting to mp3.
I am having issues with my exports. They sound best before I export them. I watched this video here, and my settings are correct. But, my mp3, waves exports are still sound way low than what I have in my mix. What else can I do to correct this issue??
Joe, I was so excited when I upgraded to 4.6 Pro to export mp3s, then I did it and was so sad at the sound, so I went back to exporting the wav and converting it, THEN I saw this video. I was on 64, changed it to 320, and what a difference! Thanks, man!
Great tip! Thank you. I'd been wondering why my mp3 versions sounded so bad. I just assumed that it was general mp3 quality. Went back and re exported a track at the highest bitrate and it's so much better!!
Perfect timing on this one. I exported a project Monday and it just sounded washed out. Very dissapointing. I saw this yesterday and checked the setting and it had defaulted to 64. Exported the same project at 320 and IT SOUNDS AMAZING!! Thanks Joe!!
Hi Wayne! Hi Joe! Just watched the 70 videos over the past 2 weeks, learning about Studio One. I’m making the switch! My older pro tower won’t work for this version and I’m preparing for a new computer purchase and then loading up the all ready purchased Studio One Pro! I am so pumped. The biggest draws for me are the drag and drop, the mastering and show sections and the included Melodyne. Thanks for the inspiration.
wowwww!!!!!!! been trying 2 figure out for a year why my quality always came out so poorly no matter how much i tried mixing down so many various ways i mean i tried everything and nothing never worked until i came across this video here i swear man you're a life saver!!!!!!!!
Hey Joe..., it“s always a great pleasure to me whenever you‘re on the screen...! Your kind a cool, funny and always interestung style to present makes me always smile...! Keep it up bro. 😎👍🏼
Man , Thank you so much for sharing this information. Never used the project page before and couldn't figure out why my MP3s sounded so bad until now. Low and behold it was the bitrate. So you in a new studio again? May the mix be with you... Always.
I got a version that doesn't have the MP3 export what version do I need or what other music file can I use just for Bass as drums to put into MP3 player or into kereoke machine?
Thanks Joe! I think we're finally "there" in the bandwidth situation. Apple music just started lossless delivery with greater than 16bit and 44.1khz options! They also added a Dolby Atmos option, but I'm not really into that. Thanks again for sharing!
Great tips Joe. Isn't it ironic that as Audio geeks we strive so hard to try to get the highest quality recording and spend countless hours to try to output the best fidelity we can and yet most consumers listen to MP3s through a pair of $10 ear buds LOL
Easily understood. One thing that wasn't mentioned that I do have a question about though is, what's the reason for choosing between a constant bitrate or variable bitrate?
Why do we want to work in 48 and then export to 44.1. Would it not be better to also work in 44.1 for easier process power while mixing recording and editing?
Man I was so down today. Been mixing a song blood sweat and tears for past week. It sounded like poo and was wondering why it’s so different to what I hear in monitors. You read my mind. Hopefully this is my problem. Ha I’ll be really down if it’s still trash.
6:19 What you say here is very true, but why do I hear the deep sound differently after exporting the wav file with DAW (Studio One 6.5, same sound card (M-Audio), same headphone, What am I doing wrong?...
Don't forget that the video you just watched goes through RUclipss quite terrible compression when it comes to audio as well. Are the videos on Sphere in better quality?
Yea this is crazy cuz I had an issue with one of my pcs where I fragmented the hard drive so it’s fairly difficult to recover many great instrumentals now I’m left with mp3 files that sound great until you try to upload them anywhere else besides SoundCloud
in my opinion Presonus should remove the options for 64 and 126 kBits/s. I don't see why they still exist. absolute minimum would be 160 kBits/s, better 192 kBits/s as the lowest option.
@@rbroach68 sounds like we found a very good use case for 160kbps 😅. you might be right. I only thought of music when writing that comment. still weird that 160 is missing in that dropdown menu in the video, but I didn't check on my system.
Hey Joe, here my Question about the kbps. Your Programmers (Ari & Co) in Hamburg, why don´t they kill the option to export in this low quality in S1. Harddrive space cannot be the answer. There are so many functions in this program (i am in since S1 V1.0) to emulate this :D. You can have also a bad sound within a 320kbps Mp3. ;p Regards...
Another great video Joe. What about bit rate for the song itself. I'm doing most of my recording at 48 and 24. Can I still export wave files without changing those? What about wav files. Love your songs BTW!
You mean samplerate there? So you mean a samplerate of 48khz and 24 bit depth? If that is the case I would say you're good to go. Work in wav as long as you can and only export to an mp3 if you need a small version to send somebody over the internet (if you got a slow connection i.e.) 44.1 khz with 16bit is standart CD quality. 44.1 khz with 24bit is usually something to work with and bounce inside the daw or exporting mixes. 48 khz is usually considered audio for video. So if you plan to use the audio for a film for example. Keep in mind that it's always best to convert to whole number multiples /divisions of the samplerate of your converting file to keep artifacts to a minimum. So: 44.1 to 88.2 to 176.4 48 to 96 to 192
Thank you so much. I was using 192kbps in my MP3 export 🤦 I sounded present in audiobooks in my DAW...then I sounded muffled after the book went live. I was like WTF after i farted myself (because girls dont poop lol) so I messed with a bunch of crap and now I'm here. Im gonna use 320 kbps 😉fml 😆
Awe Kitty 💖💖💖😍😍😍 Also, I never export to mp3. I always export to FLAC. - Also the industry is doing away with mp3 files anyways. And everyone is moving to FLAC. This includes streaming services. And yes I understand the streaming services already have mp3 files from millions of artists. Im talking about new submissions, where streaming services will soon only accept FLAC file anyways. So you minus well start getting on board now rather than later.
Bro my studio one doing me dirty. I do 2 track setup for my vocals and the second track i split events to add subtle delays on certain portions and when i export it the delays sound louder than the vocals itself but when i listen on the daw it sounds perfect smh. I need a fix asap, when i listen on on the pc wit headphones it sounds fine and when i listen from my phone speaker thats when it does what i said shit weird.
The numbers set by Joe (64, 128, 192,…) are using constant bit rate (CBR), if you set Variable Bit Rate (VBR) you use a different compression algorithm that changes the bit rate during the file compression, in theory using only the bit rate you need for each section of the file, because the songs generally don’t have the same complexity all the time.
Yip MP3 album is about 60/100Mb whilst a Flac version 32/192 is almost a gig for same tracks. 48Khz is ok for recording if your software has oversampling else 96 gives some headroom. Is flac better than MP3? Yes, potentially, depends on your audio system setup and ears, and therefore maybe not
Truthfully that 64kbps setting could be used to get an old low quality sound if you were going for that. Some of my favorite records sound worse than the 64Kbps sound in the example.
There is plenty of stuff more important than a 160kbps option for mp3 lol. If anything I'd say scrap anything until 256 kbps. Anybody can store a 5mb file nowadays since drive space sure isn't much of an issue in audio anymore.
@@leo.nordmann not really because of the size. 160kbps is the medium of 128kbps/256kbps. It always shape nasty high end and makes it sound pleasing to the ear. Things like hats, cymbals, shaker needs the high end energy to stay focus, but can also be annoying as well if not being controlled. Using 128kbps will reduce much high end energy and change the vibe of the song while 256kbps does the opposite, so I find 160kbps to be the best among the two and it doesn't change the song. Many of the afrobeat songs out there are in 160kbps mp3 and they all sound good.
@@mixprofmix Please don't take this personally, but this has the be the worst argument in defense of mp3 ever. If you wanted your hats to be smoother, then do it in mixing. It would benefit your music greatly. There are tools like smooth operator or soothe 2 which can deal which such things.
Can we please petition Presonus to make 320 kbps the default setting for mp3 export? Every time i need to troubleshoot S1 and delete my settings I invariably send a client a 64k mp3. :)
1:10 24Bit recording is not bitrate, that's bit depth. Just like an image, video or display can be 8bit, 10bit etc and dictates the amount of data or dynamic range that can be stored which would equate to volume resolution in audio and has nothing to do with rate / something over time.
yea kind of. If you apply processing before the export, the song itself will be in 44.1khz but the processing will be in 96khz. So for saturation, you will have more headroom with aliasing. Note though, that converting 44.1 to 96khz isn't probably the best idea. Better stick to multiples of the samplerate. So: 44.1 to 88.2 to 176.4 48 to 96 to 192 The technology has gotten better and it sure was way worse in earlier versions of daws and they are still different to each other when converting to non natural multiples of the samplerate. So to eliminate artifacts and aliasing it's better to stick to whole number multiples or divisions. On this website you can check daws and their conversion algorithms against each other. Unfortunately it doesn't have studio 5+ yet. src.infinitewave.ca/
@@larrytate1657 I have a network with faster storage on there. Running your daw on an external hard drive is just all kind of dumb. I run my daw from an m2 nvme my plugins are on there to and samples. I do safe on a spinning disk. 250mb/s is quick enough. already have a 3 tb song backup drive. don't feel like doing that on 96khz. going to 96 from 48 also cost me 4 outputs and 4 inputs that i do use. Also my digital output from my fender cyber twin is 44/48khz so i will get in to all kind of troubles
Keep in mind to to keep around 1.5 db of headroom when exporting a master wav and uploading it to streaming platforms. As some mp3 codecs clip if not enough headroom is already present.
Always work with wav, that's my advice. Only after mastering and maybe have a really bad internet connection like I do / want to preserve cloud space there's need for an mp3.
Not really new information for me. Know this for half my life when we used to download mp3s from the internet lol. What a lot of people don't know is to keep ~1.5 db of headroom on the master before converting to mp3. Some codecs might not need this, but just to be safe it's better to keep the headroom when converting wav to mp3 as some codecs just clip the mp3 which will make it sound shit even with 320 kb/s.
@@aleksandarstojceski3139 Yea 14 for spotify, 13 for youtube and 16 for iTunes i think. But if you go a bit higher it shouldn't be much of an issue if you stay around -12 imho
@@aleksandarstojceski3139 I personally master at around -9.5 to -10 LUFS for the loudest parts and it turns out to around -10.5 to -11 for everything which is a great balance of compression and dynamics for dance music to my ears.
I always wonder why people make videos comparing compression or frequency when RUclips will impose compression (dynamics and frequency). The differences the content creator is trying to demonstrate are barely audible because RUclips compresses the hell out of them, then in their loudness leveling also destroy dynamics and consequently bit depth. So basically it is pointless trying to demonstrate the difference between 128 kbps and 320 kbps when RUclips re-encodes at low variable rates. Re-encoding a lossy format with another lossy format. This is like a JPG file saved multiple times. It degrades and loses definition. Then on top of that, over half the viewers of RUclips view on mobile devices with sound reproduction that is abysmal. So save yourself and the audience the trouble of trying to hear the difference when RUclips won't allow for those differences to be heard. The info is spot on, but comparing is a waste of effort.
Who by? Because i would never consider any mp3 audio file no matter how good to be of CD quality! I work strictly with PCM Wave files and even then I'd never record at 44.1K 16 bit. I prefer always to work at 96K 32F or if pushed at 48K 32F therefore you both future proof the recording and have a superior quality to create your end file from. But mp3 is a degenerate file format. It's not a lossless format, only wave is truly such as is the macs equivilent. To me any audio file format that reduces the size of the original is to be steered clear of and that includes FLAC. Yoou're losing something if you are reducing the original size of the file, but that is just my preferred method of working. You may well disagree!
@@JohnDeCarteretElvis There is absolutely no loss. The algorithm is bit perfect. If you got the impression otherwise, it's due to miscommunication. The word "lossless" is not an approximation, but absolutely true. PS. Higher CPU load is true but quite negligble. The decoder is designed to be very light.
@@joeljohansson6097 No, miscomunication. I just haven't read any information in support of what you claim that there is absolutely no loss. With compression and decompression there will be some loss, no alogrithum is that good that it can squash audio and then put it back together perfectly time and time again. Everytime you save the file and then open it again multiple times. Every articule on the subject has stated that there is some loss, miniscule, slight, there is loss. FLAC is not an exact copy of the original file. The more you copy and make copies of the copy it isn't an exact copy of the original file, whereas wave is no matter how many copies and copies of copies you make. With FLAC it might be no more of a difference than 0.0000000000000000000000001 or more after the decimal point, but it is a difference none the less. As every articule has stated, there is a difference, but a difference that is not audible, unlike such as mp3 which is clerly audible. I'm quite happy for you or any one who has a preference for FLAC to use it, I have no beef with that or any format you'd care to use. I have mine and that is wave all the way. FLAC has it's limitations whereas Wave's has but one and that is the size of the file, but I that covered with adaquate storage capacity. At the end of the day as long as your happy using your preferred format and I'm happy using mine that's great. Now lets get on a make some music!
Наука
Okay now I want samples of Joe doing the warbly sound, lol
05:55 that's a great point.
You don't understand how much this just helped me out!!!!!! Like just the click of some buttons turned my mixes and master sessions to another level, been doing it so wrong for so long.smh. thank you!!
Hey Joe, even though I've been making music and engineering my own stuff for almost 40 years, I still consider myself in the "first grade" as an engineer. You have helped me graduate to the 2nd grade with your tutorials but this one - wow - I've been mystified and literally dying a thousand deaths with every master thinking I just suck! Well, now, I suck a lot less thanks to you and this tutorial. Literally, this 6:47 has changed my life and the future of my stomach (and ears). Why did I not know this?! Thank you for all that you teach us - especially those like me, still stuck in elementary school. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Your fan(and student), robby
When you export your master wav file (to be later converted to mp3 by streaming services, bandcamp etc. make sure to keep around 1.5db of headroom as some codecs clip when converting to mp3.
@@leo.nordmann Thank you.
@@RobbyBensoneo You're welcome :)
I am having issues with my exports. They sound best before I export them. I watched this video here, and my settings are correct. But, my mp3, waves exports are still sound way low than what I have in my mix. What else can I do to correct this issue??
Joe, I was so excited when I upgraded to 4.6 Pro to export mp3s, then I did it and was so sad at the sound, so I went back to exporting the wav and converting it, THEN I saw this video. I was on 64, changed it to 320, and what a difference! Thanks, man!
Great tip! Thank you. I'd been wondering why my mp3 versions sounded so bad. I just assumed that it was general mp3 quality. Went back and re exported a track at the highest bitrate and it's so much better!!
05:36 that's exactly how that sounds.
Whoa Joe your screen capture quality is super crisp and cleeean more than ever. 🙌🏼🙌🏼👍🏼👍🏼
Omg. I never knew.... Holy frijoles.... Good grief!!!! I've got to go back and check my mixes now. Straight Up Audio Gospel!! Thanks Joe!!
Learned this the hard way! Lol thanks joe you rock brother 🤘
Perfect timing on this one. I exported a project Monday and it just sounded washed out. Very dissapointing. I saw this yesterday and checked the setting and it had defaulted to 64. Exported the same project at 320 and IT SOUNDS AMAZING!! Thanks Joe!!
Hi Wayne! Hi Joe! Just watched the 70 videos over the past 2 weeks, learning about Studio One. I’m making the switch! My older pro tower won’t work for this version and I’m preparing for a new computer purchase and then loading up the all ready purchased Studio One Pro! I am so pumped. The biggest draws for me are the drag and drop, the mastering and show sections and the included Melodyne. Thanks for the inspiration.
Wow! Great tip, Joe! Making my way to get back to getting better to using Studio One.
Awesome video. Thank you for the upload and the pointers. 👌 oh and your song sounded great
Thanks I thought I was going mad found this solution the other day only happened after studio one 5 upgrade
Thanks Joe
Thank you Joe!
wowwww!!!!!!! been trying 2 figure out for a year why my quality always came out so poorly no matter how much i tried mixing down so many various ways i mean i tried everything and nothing never worked until i came across this video here i swear man you're a life saver!!!!!!!!
Thank you Mr Joe really helped.God bless you more.
Thanks so much for these tips Joe
Hey Joe..., it“s always a great pleasure to me whenever you‘re on the screen...! Your kind a cool, funny and always interestung style to present makes me always smile...! Keep it up bro. 😎👍🏼
@N. Warner indeed! 😁👍🏼
Man , Thank you so much for sharing this information. Never used the project page before and couldn't figure out why my MP3s sounded so bad until now. Low and behold it was the bitrate. So you in a new studio again? May the mix be with you... Always.
Nice Joe! :)
Thank you so much. This was exactly the problem with my mixes but I won’t have that anymore
Joe you are the best my brother! 🎉
THANK YOU FOR THIS TIP SIR!! I WAS STARTING TO LOSE MY MIND.
Omg can’t wait to go home and check. My mix is sounding like it’s coming out from radio
It reminds me of the old Myspace days and his incredible sound quality
Why does my export always sound worse even if i export in Wave?
Does the interface matter when exporting if you only use midi samples?
I got a version that doesn't have the MP3 export what version do I need or what other music file can I use just for Bass as drums to put into MP3 player or into kereoke machine?
Thank you!!!
Thank you, that helped me a lot! 😊
that sound takes me back to the 90ish first shitty mp3s
Reminds me of the Napster days. Also, make sure you're using an up-to-date codec!
Thanks Joe! I think we're finally "there" in the bandwidth situation. Apple music just started lossless delivery with greater than 16bit and 44.1khz options! They also added a Dolby Atmos option, but I'm not really into that. Thanks again for sharing!
Are companies still charging more for "wav handling"?
a whats up joe...I have a question..I got presonus studio one 5...its not letting me drag my mp3 beat on it why...do you no why
Mr Joe why rex 2 audio format is not supported in studio 1
Hey I was just curious if using the variable bitrate set to the highest setting is as good as 320Kbps constant?
figured this out ages back when youtube reduces the bitrate of the audio on lower video resolutions.
Great tips Joe. Isn't it ironic that as Audio geeks we strive so hard to try to get the highest quality recording and spend countless hours to try to output the best fidelity we can and yet most consumers listen to MP3s through a pair of $10 ear buds LOL
Yeah I was going to say they all sounded the same to me...now I know why...I thought it was my bad hearing!
Joe's stank face is LEGENDARY!!!
what do I do if the mixdown stops exporting and won't continue. Is it because the session is a hour long?
Easily understood. One thing that wasn't mentioned that I do have a question about though is, what's the reason for choosing between a constant bitrate or variable bitrate?
I have the same question.
Why do we want to work in 48 and then export to 44.1. Would it not be better to also work in 44.1 for easier process power while mixing recording and editing?
Man I was so down today. Been mixing a song blood sweat and tears for past week. It sounded like poo and was wondering why it’s so different to what I hear in monitors. You read my mind. Hopefully this is my problem. Ha I’ll be really down if it’s still trash.
meh don't worry about it just keep trying until you make something you're proud of. It's not easy
very nice thanks
Thankyou ❤️
6:19 What you say here is very true, but why do I hear the deep sound differently after exporting the wav file with DAW (Studio One 6.5, same sound card (M-Audio), same headphone, What am I doing wrong?...
Thanks. Difference is night and day.
What is better export on mp3 or flac or any other format?
Don't forget that the video you just watched goes through RUclipss quite terrible compression when it comes to audio as well. Are the videos on Sphere in better quality?
RUclips quality is actually pretty good if you watch in HD. I THINK it’s 320k but I can’t verify that.
You're very brave listening to the 64, I would never even dare lol
THAKS ALOT
Thx!
Yea this is crazy cuz I had an issue with one of my pcs where I fragmented the hard drive so it’s fairly difficult to recover many great instrumentals now I’m left with mp3 files that sound great until you try to upload them anywhere else besides SoundCloud
in my opinion Presonus should remove the options for 64 and 126 kBits/s. I don't see why they still exist. absolute minimum would be 160 kBits/s, better 192 kBits/s as the lowest option.
Some customers still require the lower settings, especially for spoken word uses. Audiobooks are rarely expoted at more than 192 kbps.
@@rbroach68 sounds like we found a very good use case for 160kbps 😅. you might be right. I only thought of music when writing that comment. still weird that 160 is missing in that dropdown menu in the video, but I didn't check on my system.
Can I still edit after I do the mix down
oh hai Joe
Joe, let me guess why you did not explain the VBR switch.... ;-)
Hey Joe, here my Question about the kbps. Your Programmers (Ari & Co) in Hamburg, why don´t they kill the option to export in this low quality in S1. Harddrive space cannot be the answer. There are so many functions in this program (i am in since S1 V1.0) to emulate this :D. You can have also a bad sound within a 320kbps Mp3. ;p Regards...
64kb reminds me of the sound quality of xm radio in the early days.
Another great video Joe. What about bit rate for the song itself. I'm doing most of my recording at 48 and 24. Can I still export wave files without changing those? What about wav files. Love your songs BTW!
I meant MP3 the first time.
You mean samplerate there? So you mean a samplerate of 48khz and 24 bit depth? If that is the case I would say you're good to go. Work in wav as long as you can and only export to an mp3 if you need a small version to send somebody over the internet (if you got a slow connection i.e.)
44.1 khz with 16bit is standart CD quality.
44.1 khz with 24bit is usually something to work with and bounce inside the daw or exporting mixes.
48 khz is usually considered audio for video. So if you plan to use the audio for a film for example.
Keep in mind that it's always best to convert to whole number multiples /divisions of the samplerate of your converting file to keep artifacts to a minimum.
So:
44.1 to 88.2 to 176.4
48 to 96 to 192
@@leo.nordmann Thanks. Appreciate the info.
Why mY audio came low when I export ...Did you guys have anY idea about that ...
Thank you so much. I was using 192kbps in my MP3 export 🤦 I sounded present in audiobooks in my DAW...then I sounded muffled after the book went live. I was like WTF after i farted myself (because girls dont poop lol) so I messed with a bunch of crap and now I'm here. Im gonna use 320 kbps 😉fml 😆
Awe Kitty 💖💖💖😍😍😍
Also, I never export to mp3. I always export to FLAC. - Also the industry is doing away with mp3 files anyways. And everyone is moving to FLAC.
This includes streaming services. And yes I understand the streaming services already have mp3 files from millions of artists.
Im talking about new submissions, where streaming services will soon only accept FLAC file anyways. So you minus well start getting on board now rather than later.
When I am exporting I am not getting exported sound same as I hear with monitor or headphone how can I get it as it I hear with real plugin effect?
Bro my studio one doing me dirty. I do 2 track setup for my vocals and the second track i split events to add subtle delays on certain portions and when i export it the delays sound louder than the vocals itself but when i listen on the daw it sounds perfect smh. I need a fix asap, when i listen on on the pc wit headphones it sounds fine and when i listen from my phone speaker thats when it does what i said shit weird.
@@maxdaprodigy914 Same problem need to find a solution that's what i am also looking for🙏
Hi Wayne. Good vid, Joe. RUclips diminished your demonstrable results, but nonetheless... informative. Thanks.
What are the constant and variable Bitrate?
The numbers set by Joe (64, 128, 192,…) are using constant bit rate (CBR), if you set Variable Bit Rate (VBR) you use a different compression algorithm that changes the bit rate during the file compression, in theory using only the bit rate you need for each section of the file, because the songs generally don’t have the same complexity all the time.
What if my session is at 44.1
And I export at 48 . Legit?
Constant vs Variable bit rate. No mention of this
I keep mine at 256kbps is that fine?
Yip MP3 album is about 60/100Mb whilst a Flac version 32/192 is almost a gig for same tracks. 48Khz is ok for recording if your software has oversampling else 96 gives some headroom. Is flac better than MP3? Yes, potentially, depends on your audio system setup and ears, and therefore maybe not
That's what I commented about 6 months ago trying to figure out mine defaulted to 64
Truthfully that 64kbps setting could be used to get an old low quality sound if you were going for that. Some of my favorite records sound worse than the 64Kbps sound in the example.
Sample rate is what it's sampled at. ....?
Glad you explained it better later LOL
What about VB?
Am a big fan of 160kbps but we don't have this in studio one, I hope presonus can implement this.
😂😂
There is plenty of stuff more important than a 160kbps option for mp3 lol. If anything I'd say scrap anything until 256 kbps. Anybody can store a 5mb file nowadays since drive space sure isn't much of an issue in audio anymore.
@@leo.nordmann not really because of the size. 160kbps is the medium of 128kbps/256kbps. It always shape nasty high end and makes it sound pleasing to the ear. Things like hats, cymbals, shaker needs the high end energy to stay focus, but can also be annoying as well if not being controlled. Using 128kbps will reduce much high end energy and change the vibe of the song while 256kbps does the opposite, so I find 160kbps to be the best among the two and it doesn't change the song. Many of the afrobeat songs out there are in 160kbps mp3 and they all sound good.
@@mixprofmix Please don't take this personally, but this has the be the worst argument in defense of mp3 ever.
If you wanted your hats to be smoother, then do it in mixing. It would benefit your music greatly. There are tools like smooth operator or soothe 2 which can deal which such things.
@@leo.nordmann Alright I heard you. Thanks for the feedback 👍
Hi and hello,Wayne!
Ok Noted... 320 Will Always Mixdown To MP3.... Thanks
Can we please petition Presonus to make 320 kbps the default setting for mp3 export? Every time i need to troubleshoot S1 and delete my settings I invariably send a client a 64k mp3. :)
1:10 24Bit recording is not bitrate, that's bit depth. Just like an image, video or display can be 8bit, 10bit etc and dictates the amount of data or dynamic range that can be stored which would equate to volume resolution in audio and has nothing to do with rate / something over time.
exactly!
Hey Wayne. From Wayne.
I could be mistaken but Im pretty sure Wayne begs for help at 3:21. Jajajaja
If my project is in 44.1khz, and I choose to export mix to 96khz, is the song actually still 44.1khz quality but just says 96khz?
yea kind of. If you apply processing before the export, the song itself will be in 44.1khz but the processing will be in 96khz. So for saturation, you will have more headroom with aliasing.
Note though, that converting 44.1 to 96khz isn't probably the best idea. Better stick to multiples of the samplerate.
So:
44.1 to 88.2 to 176.4
48 to 96 to 192
The technology has gotten better and it sure was way worse in earlier versions of daws and they are still different to each other when converting to non natural multiples of the samplerate. So to eliminate artifacts and aliasing it's better to stick to whole number multiples or divisions.
On this website you can check daws and their conversion algorithms against each other. Unfortunately it doesn't have studio 5+ yet.
src.infinitewave.ca/
@@stanleyc6225 You're welcome, well then this will give you exact information :)
Hi Wayne
Latency is lower at 96 but not enough to make me go there because of the space
Set up a usb external hard drive and run your daw off it,
@@larrytate1657 I have a network with faster storage on there. Running your daw on an external hard drive is just all kind of dumb. I run my daw from an m2 nvme my plugins are on there to and samples. I do safe on a spinning disk. 250mb/s is quick enough. already have a 3 tb song backup drive. don't feel like doing that on 96khz. going to 96 from 48 also cost me 4 outputs and 4 inputs that i do use. Also my digital output from my fender cyber twin is 44/48khz so i will get in to all kind of troubles
How to fix SoundCloud bitrate tho because it's trash
Keep in mind to to keep around 1.5 db of headroom when exporting a master wav and uploading it to streaming platforms. As some mp3 codecs clip if not enough headroom is already present.
About wave format ?
Always work with wav, that's my advice. Only after mastering and maybe have a really bad internet connection like I do / want to preserve cloud space there's need for an mp3.
Are you in yet another house/room? 😁😁🙌🏼
Not really new information for me. Know this for half my life when we used to download mp3s from the internet lol.
What a lot of people don't know is to keep ~1.5 db of headroom on the master before converting to mp3. Some codecs might not need this, but just to be safe it's better to keep the headroom when converting wav to mp3 as some codecs just clip the mp3 which will make it sound shit even with 320 kb/s.
What about lufs? Must be lower than 14 integrated?
@@aleksandarstojceski3139 Yea 14 for spotify, 13 for youtube and 16 for iTunes i think. But if you go a bit higher it shouldn't be much of an issue if you stay around -12 imho
@@aleksandarstojceski3139 I personally master at around -9.5 to -10 LUFS for the loudest parts and it turns out to around -10.5 to -11 for everything which is a great balance of compression and dynamics for dance music to my ears.
No shit, Sherlock! That´s OBVIOUS! :-D
Anyone know the name of the song ?
It's a joe gilder song. You can find his songs on Spotify and such
Nice video. #mrhnp
I remember giving my pc AIDS just for a crappy MP3. The cymbal sounds always give away the quality.
192 kbps. works for me ;-)
I always wonder why people make videos comparing compression or frequency when RUclips will impose compression (dynamics and frequency). The differences the content creator is trying to demonstrate are barely audible because RUclips compresses the hell out of them, then in their loudness leveling also destroy dynamics and consequently bit depth. So basically it is pointless trying to demonstrate the difference between 128 kbps and 320 kbps when RUclips re-encodes at low variable rates. Re-encoding a lossy format with another lossy format. This is like a JPG file saved multiple times. It degrades and loses definition. Then on top of that, over half the viewers of RUclips view on mobile devices with sound reproduction that is abysmal. So save yourself and the audience the trouble of trying to hear the difference when RUclips won't allow for those differences to be heard. The info is spot on, but comparing is a waste of effort.
Hi cat!
haahaha
More RATE is better!
(poker fans will get this)
ahh the low res version brought me back to the days of napster and limewire. yikes!!
So just get that under 320 out of S1 ;) It doesn't make sense :)
192kbps here. I remember back in the days when 128kbps was considered "CD quality" :)
Who by?
Because i would never consider any mp3 audio file no matter how good to be of CD quality!
I work strictly with PCM Wave files and even then I'd never record at 44.1K 16 bit. I prefer always to work at 96K 32F or if pushed at 48K 32F therefore you both future proof the recording and have a superior quality to create your end file from. But mp3 is a degenerate file format. It's not a lossless format, only wave is truly such as is the macs equivilent.
To me any audio file format that reduces the size of the original is to be steered clear of and that includes FLAC. Yoou're losing something if you are reducing the original size of the file, but that is just my preferred method of working. You may well disagree!
@@JohnDeCarteretElvis Flac is de facto lossless. When you play/decode it, not a single bit is different to a wav. It's a mathematical fact :)
@@joeljohansson6097 Not quite so as there is a loss in FLAC, however so slight. but it is quaoted as 'without any noticable loss,,' but there is loss.
FLAC isn't an exact copy, where as wave is and I prefer to work with an exact copy and also not to work with compressed files or files that have been compressed and require coding and decoding. Something is always lost in the process Just my preference as to the format I will comfortably work with.
The only benefit of FLAC over wave is the space that it can save you. I still wouldn't touch it over wave, but over mp3, definately!
And I would imagine that it adds further load to your cpu as it requires coding and decodong and when running 50+ tracks, that has to hurt!
(Quote) Choosing FLAC or WAV also means you are selecting between compressed and uncompressed formats. One significant difference between FLAC and WAV is that while the former is compressed, the latter is an exact copy of the original audio file. Converting an audio file to FLAC means you are compressing it to occupy less space compared to WAV, but without any noticeable loss in quality. So, if storage space is your main concern, choose FLAC over WAV because it achieves up to 60% compression of the source file.
Read more: www.movavi.com/learning-portal/flac-vs-wav.html © Movavi.com
@@JohnDeCarteretElvis There is absolutely no loss. The algorithm is bit perfect. If you got the impression otherwise, it's due to miscommunication. The word "lossless" is not an approximation, but absolutely true.
PS. Higher CPU load is true but quite negligble. The decoder is designed to be very light.
@@joeljohansson6097 No, miscomunication. I just haven't read any information in support of what you claim that there is absolutely no loss. With compression and decompression there will be some loss, no alogrithum is that good that it can squash audio and then put it back together perfectly time and time again.
Everytime you save the file and then open it again multiple times. Every articule on the subject has stated that there is some loss, miniscule, slight, there is loss. FLAC is not an exact copy of the original file. The more you copy and make copies of the copy it isn't an exact copy of the original file, whereas wave is no matter how many copies and copies of copies you make.
With FLAC it might be no more of a difference than 0.0000000000000000000000001 or more after the decimal point, but it is a difference none the less. As every articule has stated, there is a difference, but a difference that is not audible, unlike such as mp3 which is clerly audible.
I'm quite happy for you or any one who has a preference for FLAC to use it, I have no beef with that or any format you'd care to use. I have mine and that is wave all the way. FLAC has it's limitations whereas Wave's has but one and that is the size of the file, but I that covered with adaquate storage capacity.
At the end of the day as long as your happy using your preferred format and I'm happy using mine that's great. Now lets get on a make some music!