What can I do with WAV files that I can't with MP3 files?

[sjs94704]

I am a singer. I have been getting my pre-recorded music from a website that only offers their backing track in MP3 format. At the time I started buying them I was not aware as I am now that using WAV files is preferred.

I just found another website that does offer their tracks in WAV format.

Since these are pre-recorded tracks, for the most part, they are ready for use 'as is' without the need for too much EQ or other processing.

So, I am just trying to confirm, what are the major advantages of using WAV files vs. MP3 files?

The next thing is, for the volume envelope, I will want to be doing some automation. Should it be the Pre-FX volume envelope?

[ashcat_lt]

As far as inside Reaper, there's not much difference. When you drop an MP3 into a track, Reaper will decode it and treat it exactly like any wav file.

The big difference is in the files themselves - the artifacts created in the encode/decode process. These won't even necessarily be noticeable listening to the track as is, but when you start adding processing - compression and EQ especially - they can start to come out and become much more noticeable.

It's only a problem if it's a problem, but if you stick to .wav , it can't ever be a problem at all.

I end up working with mp3s pretty often, and even though I'm literally just making noise, those artifacts can sometimes be too much.

[sjs94704]

The website that has the songs in MP3 format I can get for around $3.00 per song. The website with the WAV files charges $10 per song!

[sjs94704]

Or, do you think I should try to leave well enough alone?

What I did notice is that for example, the song has an electric piano. Once I started adding some EQ to it the true details in how the piano sounds started to come out which is what I am hoping for!

As you mentioned, I'm not so sure I could do that with any degree of success using MP3 files.

[ashcat_lt]

I'm not trying to make any economic decisions for you.

Everybody would prefer wav every time if they get the choice.

But I mean, if you've got $3 you don't really need, grab one of the MP3 packs and give it a shot. It might work just fine for your purposes. Be aware though that the next one might actually not work at all. If nothing else, you'll have first hand experience of the actual issue.

[serr]

Originally Posted by sjs94704

I am a singer. I have been getting my pre-recorded music from a website that only offers their backing track in MP3 format. At the time I started buying them I was not aware as I am now that using WAV files is preferred.

I just found another website that does offer their tracks in WAV format.

Since these are pre-recorded tracks, for the most part, they are ready for use 'as is' without the need for too much EQ or other processing.

So, I am just trying to confirm, what are the major advantages of using WAV files vs. MP3 files?

Well, you would be able to pull and tug on the audio and dig into the decimal dust without almost immediately hitting a back wall of pure noise.

In theory anyway!

What you are going to discover is that audio isn't always at the fullest quality the delivery format used supports. Silly example: Put a 64k mp3 file on a bluray. Now you have a bluray (normally associated with 24 bit HD audio) sounding like a mp3.

Formats can be a calling card for what to generally expect.
A bluray or 24 bit FLAC download suggests you might get an audiophile quality HD master. A CD or mp3 version of a release is usually limited and boosted and often brightened (beyond any considerations of the format). But you can find outliers out there too. A CD that sounds great and a bluray that has been volume war pummeled.

I've found that when you go looking for mix stems, the quality is poor regardless of the delivery format. You'll find mix stems made for that Rockband game or Jammit. Even in wav format, these all sound like they were limited/boosted and brighten like is typical for CD versions and they sound suspiciously like they've been run through the mp3 meat grinder as well. Someone wanted the stems to still sound "bangin" on Playstation speakers or some karaoke machine from Worst Purchase.

Originally Posted by sjs94704

The next thing is, for the volume envelope, I will want to be doing some automation. Should it be the Pre-FX volume envelope?

There isn't any undo data or something 'baked' into wav files that would let you derive anything pre-fx. That's the other thing with mix stems you'll find. They aren't anywhere near as separated as you would like!


FYI, this stuff is shared online. Sometimes it's a rip from that Rockband game, sometimes audio schools get mix stems to work with. Please don't give any money to the bootleggers though! This stuff is NOT legitimately sold. The artist gets nothing. Don't ever pay for an mp3 (treat mp3 like a calling card). Sometimes karaoke backing tracks are officially sold of course. But the quality is still bootleg level.


Practice on this stuff. Understand that the fidelity has been stepped on to the point where you will NOT be able to hit what the released mix was no matter what you do. Don't ever pay for these tracks! You often find stuff rerecorded (and it's obvious and silly). You even find MIDI abominations (as in crudely programmed MIDI parts and not the original tracks at all).

[sjs94704]

OK, well, I'm not expecting to get the 'original tracks'.

Here is a link to the website where I am getting my stuff from:

https://songgalaxy.com/audio-files

If you click on the GOLD multi-tracks, that is what I'm buying.

[vdubreeze]

Sometimes a site will offer mp3s for much less than wavs of the same material because there's theoretically less of a possibility of the end user creating a sellable product with the files. It sort of divides it into files for home use and files for professional use. Naturally, nothing prevents either from being used in the other domain, but think of it as giving a discount on lossy compressed files with artifacts (often barely audible) rather than charging a premium for uncompressed wav files.