Be a Supporter!

Is .wav Better Than .mp3?

  • 548 Views
  • 20 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
helxliankid
helxliankid
  • Member since: Jul. 27, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 18th, 2008 @ 06:23 PM Reply

I just just reading the audio optimization tutorial on this site and it recommended importing audio files as .WAVs. I looked at this and then converted several files from MP3 to WAV, but I noticed the file size jumped from 700 KB to about 7 MB. I thought, that can't be right. So I'm wondering, is it better to use WAV or MP3 to keep files low in size and have good loops.

winKoneR
winKoneR
  • Member since: Aug. 16, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 13
Musician
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 18th, 2008 @ 06:33 PM Reply

keep it in wav... wav is wav, with the every sound as recorded... in mp3, you don't have some sounds from wav, but you can't hear them with human ear ;) that's why is mp3 lesser that wavs and you think there is no difference... but because of this removing of sounds in converting, the quality of mp3 sound is lesser... so keep it in wav... vinyls and cd's are recorded with wav because of quality, mp3 are just for mp3 players and pc's...

sorry for my bad engrish...

winKoneR
winKoneR
  • Member since: Aug. 16, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 13
Musician
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 18th, 2008 @ 06:35 PM Reply

sorry for double post... but I just want to help...

I googled this... it's maybe easier to understand than my engrish XD

>>
While MP3s have been getting all the press lately, the rumors of WAV's death have been greatly exaggerated. These two formats are comparable to the old and new models of the VW bug -- dependable versus flashy. Both have their merits, but MP3 seems more likely to be in it for the long haul.

An older music format, WAV was designed by Microsoft to play short snippets of sound on any audio-enabled computer. Since Windows 3.1, WAV has been the native format for sound within the Windows environment. As a result, WAV files abound on the Web, and almost every browser has built-in WAV playback support. Check out the WAV Archives in Yahoo!'s directory for some examples.

The WAV file format is very basic. Unlike MP3 and other compressed formats, WAVs are just digitized sound samples. They're bulky, but simple; any computer can play them, and they sound fine.

MP3 stands for MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3. The MPEG process compresses a sound sequence into a very small file, while retaining its original quality. How? By being very selective and eliminating certain sound frequencies that can't be heard by the human ear. The format compresses the file to approximately 1/12 the size of the original file, making it quicker to download or share with a friend.

Though they both sound fine, the differences between the two file formats are quite profound. WAVs are much bulkier than MP3s, but require no additional software to play. MP3s require special players such as Napster or WinAmp. MP3s are better suited for swapping songs over the Web, while WAVs work better for audio-enhanced web sites. The choice is yours.

helxliankid
helxliankid
  • Member since: Jul. 27, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 18th, 2008 @ 06:45 PM Reply

What about in terms of file size? Because WAV is uncompressed it is greater file size, right? Is that a reasonable price to pay for better sound quality.

In case this makes any difference, I'm using these sound files as background music for a game I'm working on and when it comes to this, music is just a nice addition, not a necessity. I do want to make the songs in it, but I want to have my game flow smoothly and be low in file size.

xKore
xKore
  • Member since: May. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 16
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 18th, 2008 @ 06:51 PM Reply

At 5/18/08 06:45 PM, helxliankid wrote: What about in terms of file size? Because WAV is uncompressed it is greater file size, right? Is that a reasonable price to pay for better sound quality.

In case this makes any difference, I'm using these sound files as background music for a game I'm working on and when it comes to this, music is just a nice addition, not a necessity. I do want to make the songs in it, but I want to have my game flow smoothly and be low in file size.

For flash movies that are downloaded by thousands of people and have a relatively small file size limit, then I think it's pretty obvious to keep audio files in mp3. But you have to find the right bit rate (quality) to compromise between the quality of the mp3 and space taken up, I think it's best to finish the game/movie then use the remaining space for music at the highest possible quality without going over the file limit.

But seeing as this is the audio forum, I just have to say, always use wavs up until the final render for uploading.

endlessnumber
endlessnumber
  • Member since: Sep. 15, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 14
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 18th, 2008 @ 06:58 PM Reply

Converting to wavs from mp3s doesn't get you anything if I am right, since the mp3 encoding has already lost the sound which it loses, and it's not like it will magically reappear. I mean, that's why the file's so much smaller, so why would converting back to wav help.

Nav
Nav
  • Member since: Jan. 6, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Audiophile
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 18th, 2008 @ 07:09 PM Reply

At 5/18/08 06:58 PM, endlessnumber wrote: Converting to wavs from mp3s doesn't get you anything if I am right, since the mp3 encoding has already lost the sound which it loses, and it's not like it will magically reappear. I mean, that's why the file's so much smaller, so why would converting back to wav help.

Completely right. The only single advantage would be for audio authors, whose tools mainly work with .wavs, not .mp3s (they get autodecoded to wav when they are stored on the ram for usage). Otherwise, if it is an mp3, let it stay an mp3.

Ace75
Ace75
  • Member since: Feb. 5, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 18th, 2008 @ 07:22 PM Reply

Niether is better than one another. They're just different formats.

JoeyNukes
JoeyNukes
  • Member since: May. 6, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 18th, 2008 @ 08:01 PM Reply

At 5/18/08 07:22 PM, Ace75 wrote: Niether is better than one another. They're just different formats.

Wrong! WAV is lossless and uncompressed, resulting in mammoth file sizes but greater sound quality. MP3 is a lossy format that deletes certain bits of a audio to save space, but with less quality.

Generally you won't find much of a difference unless you're using an awesome setup, MP3 are perfectly suitable for casual listening.

@ Topic Starter, you're better off using WAV, since they compress better in flash and loop better. MP3s store ID3 data at the beginning or ending of a file resulting in a milisecond of silence, which is just enough to throw off your loop.

hellsmaw18
hellsmaw18
  • Member since: Jun. 29, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 03:03 AM Reply

wave is real time but takes a lot of space whereas mp3 uses compression but loses some parts whereas aac or aac+ or other higher end compressions keep the real time but keeps all parts, unfortunately only some devices and media players support AAC technology

hellsmaw18
hellsmaw18
  • Member since: Jun. 29, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 03:06 AM Reply

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Au dio_Coding check it out if youd like, this is why i like aac over mp3

SkyMarshall
SkyMarshall
  • Member since: Apr. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 10:59 AM Reply

WAV = The original sound from production with all dynamics intact.
MP3 = Compressed and raped beyond belief. From 160kbps and up it gets nice though.


BBS Signature
xXDathDalerXx
xXDathDalerXx
  • Member since: Apr. 5, 2001
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 23
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 02:53 PM Reply

if you convert an mp3 to a wav it won't sound the same as if it were an original wav, so there's no point in that if you ask me

& an mp3 at 320kb is about 95% close to the sound of an original wav, & only bout 1/5 of the size


Congratulations! You just destroyed someone else's hard work! This Flash has been blammed.

pr0de
pr0de
  • Member since: Dec. 28, 2001
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 19
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 03:15 PM Reply

ten replies of saying the same thing? do you people pick up on things

Shenkhar
Shenkhar
  • Member since: Sep. 1, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 04:39 PM Reply

Just use FLAC, freaking huuuuge - but amazing quality. Also, with studio quality headphones (freq range from 5-35000) you can totally hear the diffrence between lossy and lossless encoding.


You will lol, and you will like it.

BBS Signature
dirtydigital
dirtydigital
  • Member since: Jan. 8, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 04:43 PM Reply

I hope NG changes to FLAC

ZooSafari
ZooSafari
  • Member since: Apr. 24, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 01
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 06:20 PM Reply

Actually when you're working on building a song, its better to use WAV, not because of the depth of sound, but because its a single sound ur using, let me explain this:

When you record a sound or for example your voice, you are using a single mono input (WAV=mono) which is your microphone, you cant put it that as MP3 or stereo, that will cause 2 things: 1 lost of depth of sound and 2 overwhelm of sound, that would cause distortion or clipping on the track.

So yeah WAV is good when working in the studio and MP3 to release the final product ; )

TMM43
TMM43
  • Member since: Jun. 26, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Moderator
Level 08
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 06:32 PM Reply

Huh. I learned something today...

I always thought...that dogs...laid eggs.


..............The Guide to Newgrounds Audio
Latest Track: Infinity
Need Help? Real Life|Audio

BBS Signature
xKore
xKore
  • Member since: May. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 16
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 06:35 PM Reply

At 5/19/08 06:20 PM, ZooSafari wrote: When you record a sound or for example your voice, you are using a single mono input (WAV=mono) which is your microphone, you cant put it that as MP3 or stereo, that will cause 2 things: 1 lost of depth of sound and 2 overwhelm of sound, that would cause distortion or clipping on the track.

Both WAV and MP3 can store stereo and mono information.

pr0de
pr0de
  • Member since: Dec. 28, 2001
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 19
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 06:45 PM Reply

At 5/19/08 04:39 PM, Shenkhar wrote: Just use FLAC, freaking huuuuge

i think the size of flac is smaller than wav

hellsmaw18
hellsmaw18
  • Member since: Jun. 29, 2005
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 10
Blank Slate
Response to Is .wav Better Than .mp3? May. 19th, 2008 @ 10:39 PM Reply

wav is still too large, try taking a full length song (preferably your favorite song NOT submitted by an ng user (maybe a good ac/dc song)) and convert that to wav, you WILL see the difference. wav is to much trouble to deal with. like i said, AAC is the best way to go. but we have to wait for ng supports AAC compressions.