MP3 encoder simulation plugin coming from Sonnox & Fraunhoffer

[AudioGeekZine]

Sonnox and Fraunhoffer are working on a plugin that will allow you to hear your master in various encoding schemes in real time.
For example, Hear how a 192kbps mp3 conversion will result and adjust the master to compensate in realtime.

This is a great idea. No idea when it's out.

 

[Melodeath]

I already made a thread about this. It's cool, but it's $499 :/

 

[006]

$499.

I lol'ed.

 

[RedDog]

Or just bounce 30 seconds of it.

"I just saved $499 on my project bill by switching to Not-Fuckin'-Lazy!"

 

[JeffTD]

Or just bounce 30 seconds of it.

"I just saved $499 on my project bill by switching to Not-Fuckin'-Lazy!"

Completely disrupts workflow, and isn't as easy to A/B on a mix.

The same could be said for monitor switching control systems - "stop being a lazy fuck and unplug/plug in some cables"

 

[Sloan]

It doesn't take very long to encode a whole fucking song unless your doing an epic 3 hr bonnaroo jam (fuck that shit).

 

[RedDog]

Completely disrupts workflow, and isn't as easy to A/B on a mix.

The same could be said for monitor switching control systems - "stop being a lazy fuck and unplug/plug in some cables"

So you'd spend half a grand to minimize workflow interruptions up to 3 minutes long?

Wish I had that kind of cash to blow.

 

[The Unavoidable]

$499.

I lol'ed.

Hahah, this ^

 

[Ermz]

Mixing specifically for mp3? Fucking terrible. What an awful concept.

 

[JeffTD]

Mixing specifically for mp3? Fucking terrible. What an awful concept.

We had this discussion in another thread, and as much as you hate the mp3 codec, it's going to be around and be the main forum of digital music distribution for the foreseeable future. Why not maximize the quality of your mix on every format, and maybe better save at least some semblance of the mix when it's converted into a lossy format?

I would MUCH rather have a choice over how my stuff is going to sound in MP3 than just be subject to the whim of the encoding process after the fact.

 

[RedDog]

We had this discussion in another thread, and as much as you hate the mp3 codec, it's going to be around and be the main forum of digital music distribution for the foreseeable future. Why not maximize the quality of your mix on every format, and maybe better save at least some semblance of the mix when it's converted into a lossy format?

I would MUCH rather have a choice over how my stuff is going to sound in MP3 than just be subject to the whim of the encoding process after the fact.

I wouldn't want to have to tune my mixes to mp3. That's just retarded.

Besides, why tune your mixes to the fraunhoffer codec when there are better codecs out there? And if I used a good codec to begin with, I really wouldn't care about tuning my mix to any lossy format. I'd much rather mix it right, and then export as a high bitrate mp3. It's not like choosing between 256 kbps and 96 kbps is a $500 question.

 

[JeffTD]

You're missing the point entirely. If your music is going to end up in MP3 anyways, because of iPod's/AmazonMP3/facebook/youtube/myspace/the internet in general, why not make sure your mix sounds the best it possibly can in that particular format?

iPod headphones sound like shit, but people still use them to reference and make sure their mixes sound good on them because that's how people listen to music these days. We used to think that if it sounded killer on your Genelecs but not on a boombox that it was a bad mix. The curve isn't as drastic between WAV and mp3, but it's still there - why rule out another reference source that's widely used by the public for listening?

We complain all fucking day long about how bad those formats sound, but the moment someone introduces a viable way of maximizing our mix potential for those specific formats, we shit on it? I really don't understand this forum sometimes. Regardless of whether or not you like the whole mp3 takeover thing that's happened in the last 10 years, it's not going anywhere, and your constant bitching and moaning isn't going to change that unless you code something better yourself.

 

[006]

I dunno about these other guys but my issue isn't with the idea of it, just the price.

 

[Mesa4x12er]

Mixing specifically for mp3? Fucking terrible. What an awful concept.

I was waiting to hear from you.

I agree though. It's one thing to accept your stuff will eventually turn into MP3 but to mix with a specific encoding in mind while maybe worthwhile in some situations is rather disheartening. What's the point of busting your ass with practice, technique, and $$$ equipment when at the end of your chain you degrade anyway.

So yes I can see the usefulness in this but it still feels weird. It's like telling a 5 she's a 10 to get laid. It just isn't right.

 

[StefTD]

I agree with Jeff, but like 006 said, the price is the issue imho.

 

[Ermz]

We complain all fucking day long about how bad those formats sound, but the moment someone introduces a viable way of maximizing our mix potential for those specific formats, we shit on it?.

Because it comes at the cost of not gearing the work toward the actual intended end format, which is uncompressed 16-bit 44kHz.

Present format mp3s will always sound bad, that is one undeniable truth. There is no point to be mixing specifically for a format that inherently professes a disdain for audio fidelity. Or at least considers it a distant second to the convenience of storage space.

Assuming that the music will end up in mp3 is fine, but that's a byproduct - not the actual product. Most of the time mp3 is used as the standard streaming format for really low-fidelity players like Myspace, Youtube etc. etc. but the end product still ends up primarily pressed and distributed via CD. At least my work does. So it really would come down to us mixing specifically for the people who would pirate the record online. Why would I possibly want to reward them over the people who care enough to actually purchase a CD and listen to the record as intended?

Sure, a lot of bands now distribute solely through mp3, but we've had that discussion already. Some of us want no part in it whatsoever. Hence taking us back to: 'What an awful concept.'

 

[::XeS::]

And I would spend those 500$ for something that improves my mixes or my recordings...not for something that simulates a shitty compression

 

[JeffTD]

Because it comes at the cost of not gearing the work toward the actual intended end format, which is uncompressed 16-bit 44kHz.

Present format mp3s will always sound bad, that is one undeniable truth. There is no point to be mixing specifically for a format that inherently professes a disdain for audio fidelity. Or at least considers it a distant second to the convenience of storage space.

Assuming that the music will end up in mp3 is fine, but that's a byproduct - not the actual product. Most of the time mp3 is used as the standard streaming format for really low-fidelity players like Myspace, Youtube etc. etc. but the end product still ends up primarily pressed and distributed via CD. At least my work does. So it really would come down to us mixing specifically for the people who would pirate the record online. Why would I possibly want to reward them over the people who care enough to actually purchase a CD and listen to the record as intended?

Sure, a lot of bands now distribute solely through mp3, but we've had that discussion already. Some of us want no part in it whatsoever. Hence taking us back to: 'What an awful concept.'

This is all fine, but only if you're assuming that you're going to bounce one copy of everything and leave it at that. What I'm talking about is bouncing masters for formats specifically - bounce the DDP that goes to the pressing plant normally, but also double check and make adjustments with the Sonnox plugin when you bounce for digital distribution sites that work with MP3's anyways.

I don't see why anyone wouldn't want an mp3 to sound the best it could? If that required minor mix adjustments compared to an uncompressed version, wouldn't that be worth it and preserve as much fidelity as possible, rather than just accept and deal with what the compression will do to your mix?

The other thing we're all forgetting is that this plugin could very likely have been geared towards video game and movie audio production - I can see it being incredibly useful there, where any space saved in digital distribution is a huge advantage.

 

[AudioGeekZine]

I think the price is too high for widespread home studio usage, but for Major Label Mastering Engineers this will be a no-brainer. MP3 is here to stay, doing a second master for digital distribution (myspace mastering etc) is not uncommon now.
It would be nice to have some control over how things end up on the other side of the encoder. At least so it's not so depressing.

 

[egan.]

I agree with Jeff and will add the same thing I added in the other thread which is that some of us work in mediums that will end up compressed 100% of the time. Video games, web video and podcast audio are all going to end up compressed for the foreseeable future. You wouldn't believe how small game SFX have to be in a lot of instances. I for one love the idea of hearing that compression without rendering.
I want 24bit/96k to become the audio standard as much or more than anyone, but I'm not going to deny the reality of where my work will end up in the meantime.