Questions About Coding

[Ronald Zeeman]

This Is why I ignored computers since college. Knew I would be able to buy off the shelf in the future. let others do the work, worked for me retired now.

 

[717]

In a great many videos the soundtrack is already in MP3 format, MP3 is the soundtrack segment of an MP4. A video editor like KdEnlive can lift that out for you.

OK but why no WAV?

There is a lot of them that can be downloaded pirate, and a lot of websites that sell this files...

soundtrack for albums to download in True CD Quality (Lossless), 24-Bit Hi-Res - Qobuz

That is an example of a website.

Even getting the CD and ripping it off would give you better quality...

I am just saying, if I was going to spend 3 hours fine tuning some audio files, I personally would prefer to work with better quality than MP3... maybe there is something I'm missing.

 

[RemyZee]

The onliest thing I know about coding was from a few years back, I tried to learn a little about html, just because I wanted too understand something basic about programming, so I spent a while on it. Apparently it is pretty basic, because even I could learn it...but one thing about it goes back to that old idea: "you start at the beginning." I wound up making a couple of really easy webpages, but mostly it was fun, and if you start with HTML, for me, it was like it built on itself, starts simply and gradually becomes more complex. Then you move to take a look at other systems. It really is like learning a language, at least for me--like you start with basic grammatical construction, "See Jane run" kind of thing. And it gradually builds on itself, but you have to start at the beginning, whereas I think lots of people want to start with the complex stuff. But I wound up making a couple of web pages that I liked, gave me a sense of accomplishment, and showed a little bit about how it all works.

 

[Judge]

Why you start with an MP3 file instead of a format that is uncompressed and lossless?

And more interesting... how do you modify the music? like, what you change in it?

Some of the most obscure music I enjoy cannot find is often obtainable through the MP3 format. Other sources of my personal CD collection I transfer to MP3 at 192k bit rate. The compression algorithm is also oddly useful when it comes to recording old CrO2 cassette tapes as well given the process itself removes unwanted tape noise.

The most common thing I do with all tracks is to give them one second of silence at the beginning, and two seconds at the end. Many sources have ridiculously lengthy amounts of silence and I like them to be uniform in this respect. On occasion I will also selectively modify the volume up or down depending on the track. And of course if there is any kind of momentary audio glitch I will edit it out so it sounds clean all the way through. I also occasionally alter both fade-ins and fade-outs to my liking.

I am just saying, if I was going to spend 3 hours fine tuning some audio files, I personally would prefer to work with better quality than MP3... maybe there is something I'm missing.

1) At my age (nearly 70) my range of hearing is not what it used to be when I would have considered myself an "audiophile" back in the 80s. Plus I have tinnitus now. So there's not much point in being pissy about audio recording in compressed formats versus uncompressed formats still at a much higher dynamic range than those of the analogue era I grew up in. (Vinyl records and cassette tapes).

I enjoy doing the work. But then I'm also retired. What may be "work" to you is "play" for me.

Also I can play MP3 files directly from a USB 3.0 port of my Roku device or my television. Though my Roku Media Player does not support uncompressed audio formats anyways. Besides, unlike having to handle physical media I like having access to my entire music collection with just a remote in my hand! Before MP3s, I never had that kind of convenience.

2) And as a renter I cannot use my audio system to volumes I would like anyways. In as much as I like music, I also appreciate the silence from most of my neighbors. So I have to keep the volume down most of the time. Rather than be concerned about compressed sound, in fact I'm always trying to tinker around with ways of attenuating the bass, without subtracting too much from the dynamic range I do have after compression.

In essence being evicted by a corporate landlord would prove to be much more problematic than stewing over digitally compressed audio algorithms that still yielded decent signal-to-noise ratios compared to inferior types of analogue recording that I grew up with. That for me it's more a matter of perspective in enjoying "cleaner" digital sound than striving for dynamic range I cannot truly optimize at much lower volumes.

 

[Outdated]

OK but why no WAV?

File size. Simple as that. Old CDs used to be in CDA format which basically is just a wav file. In that format your average song is 50 to 70 Mb in size, and that's just a 3 minute song, not a feature length film.

Most of my music library I ripped from Cd myself as 256 kpbs MP3s, it took me hundreds of hours. If I'd used a lossless format my library would be close to 4 terrabytes instead of just 350 gig. 7000 CDs.