Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules

- No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!
- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.
- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.
- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

Resampling?, From CD to WAV
post Jun 2 2005, 18:11
Post #1

Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 2-June 05
Member No.: 22477


Like many people, I want to convert my Cd's collection into MP3 files, using the
Lame combining with the Razorlame GUI. But, before beginning, I ask myself
some questions; one of this is the following : has this a sense, when converting
Wav files previously extracted from a CD, to resampling the extracted files in
48 Hz in place of conserving them in their original 44,1 Khz?
Logically no, we cannot get more precision that this giving originnaly from the
CD; but, i try, and I obtain a file that has not the same frequencies response that
this obtained with conserving the original 44,1Khz sampling rate of the CD;
the difference is basically in middle and high frequencies though being soft.
Who can me explain that fact??


Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Start new topic
post Jun 3 2005, 10:29
Post #2

ReplayGain developer

Group: Developer
Posts: 5458
Joined: 5-November 01
From: Yorkshire, UK
Member No.: 409

I think you've joined the wrong forum Deuterium. wink.gif

Hydrogen audio is very strong on facts, science, and very carefully carried out listening tests.

Resampling to 48kHz loses a little data due to rounding errors, and doesn't add anything real to the signal. However, some sound cards resample everything to 48kHz badly internally, so doing it well yourself can improve the sound quality.

xmixahlx is right that lossy codecs like mp3 are tuned at 44.1kHz - the performance at 48kHz is not nearly as well optimised or tested.

If you read the FAQ, you'll find out why a lowpass filter before a lossy codec is a good thing. Even at 320kbps, you're thowing away 3/4 of the signal - it's daft to force the codec to keep parts that you can't hear in preference to parts that you can!

I can't argue against your desire to use 320kbps for the best possible quality, but you might want to check you can hear the difference between that and a preset which typically gives a much lower bitrate, and has been tested extensively and shown to sound identical to the CD in 99.999% of cases.

You know that even 320kbps mp3 is going to sound different from the CD in some very rare cases, don't you?

You are, of course, welcome to ask any questions you like - but you might make yourself look a little silly if you don't read at least part of the FAQ and the Terms Of Service first. The mp3 section of the FAQ (see the button, FAQ, top right of the page?) is a great place to start.

Hope this helps.


This post has been edited by 2Bdecided: Jun 3 2005, 10:31
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Deuterium   Resampling?   Jun 2 2005, 18:11
- - xmixahlx   no, it doesn't make sense. most lossy codecs ...   Jun 2 2005, 18:40
- - dreamliner77   ABX test and get back to us.   Jun 3 2005, 00:51
- - Deep_Elem   Don't use razorlame either. Use the binary and...   Jun 3 2005, 01:48
- - Jebus   I use razorlame all the time for the pretty output...   Jun 3 2005, 02:46
|- - Deuterium   QUOTE (Jebus @ Jun 3 2005, 03:46 AM)I use raz...   Jun 3 2005, 10:21
|- - PoisonDan   QUOTE (Deuterium @ Jun 3 2005, 11:21 AM)I don...   Jun 3 2005, 11:55
|- - Deuterium   QUOTE (PoisonDan @ Jun 3 2005, 12:55 PM)QUOTE...   Jun 3 2005, 12:05
|- - Jebus   QUOTE (Deuterium @ Jun 3 2005, 03:05 AM)Suck ...   Jun 3 2005, 16:33
- - dreamliner77   Yeah, razorlame has no problem using the presets.   Jun 3 2005, 06:17
- - 2Bdecided   I think you've joined the wrong forum Deuteriu...   Jun 3 2005, 10:29
- - xmixahlx   well, you are going from a 44.1 source, so... i...   Jun 3 2005, 10:29
- - dreamliner77   Thank you.   Jun 3 2005, 15:31
- - Otto42   Wow. Now we need to create a "petrogenaudio...   Jun 3 2005, 16:42
|- - Cyaneyes   QUOTE (Otto42 @ Jun 3 2005, 11:42 AM)Wow. Now...   Jun 3 2005, 16:52
- - Rotareneg   Who are we to say that resampling would make it so...   Jun 3 2005, 19:59
|- - Deuterium   QUOTE (Rotareneg @ Jun 3 2005, 08:59 PM)Who a...   Jun 3 2005, 20:26
|- - Deuterium   QUOTE (Deuterium @ Jun 3 2005, 09:26 PM)QUOTE...   Jun 3 2005, 20:37
|- - tgoose   QUOTE (Deuterium @ Jun 3 2005, 08:37 PM)Thank...   Jun 3 2005, 20:50
- - Jan S.   I'll make the pain go away now... If you expec...   Jun 3 2005, 21:42

Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 6th March 2015 - 23:28