Audio formats pro tools.

[Greg0man]

Hello, I am new to this but have some understanding of audio file formats.
The question I have is :
When say importing a backing music track into pro tools , is it better to import a Wav file and bounce as Wav file vs Mp3 file? Or better to import as Wav file and export as mp3? I will be using a pre recorded Backing track, and then adding vocals . For uploading to Ytube and FB.

[Drew Mazurek]

Originally Posted by Greg0man

For uploading to Ytube and FB.

If it's for these two places only, it doesn't really matter then. Their compression schemes are so horrible you'll likely not be able to tell anyway.

[Greg0man]

So what you are saying is that regardless of quality of recording . That it will be compressed by face book and or Youtube?

[Darryl Ramm]

Yes, but at higher video quality you get better playback. But don't necessarily drag all you work down some low-quality output.

But... fundamentally your question is not answerable. Wav is not an audio codec spec, it is a audio file/container spec. The contents can vary greatly in sample rate, bit depth, compression etc. So can MP3. So to answer your question you need to know detailed information on the content of those files, bit depth, sample rate, etc. However in most situations a "well made"/high end Wav file will usually be much preferable to an MP3. But don't guess, find out.

[Drew Mazurek]

Originally Posted by Greg0man

So what you are saying is that regardless of quality of recording . That it will be compressed by face book and or Youtube?

Pretty much.

If you want it to be "future proof" record in Wav and then export to mp3.

But if your music tracks originate from youtube, converting them to wav will not make them sound better.

Hope this is making sense.

[Greg0man]

If you want it to be "future proof" record in Wav and then export to mp3.

But if your music tracks originate from youtube, converting them to wav will not make them sound better.

I agree makes more since to start with a clean raw uncompressed backing track, Import into Protools. Export out as MP3 320kbs.

But if I cana get the original trak in WAV format. and export it out in WAV , and then upload to inernet , is that better than mp3 at 320kbps.

[Greg0man]

Originally Posted by Darryl Ramm

Yes, but at higher video quality you get better playback. But don't necessarily drag all you work down some low-quality output.

But... fundamentally your question is not answerable. Wav is not an audio codec spec, it is a audio file/container spec. The contents can vary greatly in sample rate, bit depth, compression etc. So can MP3. So to answer your question you need to know detailed information on the content of those files, bit depth, sample rate, etc. However in most situations a "well made"/high end Wav file will usually be much preferable to an MP3. But don't guess, find out.

I agree to many variables . but assumming MP3 at 320Kbps vs Wav with all it's baggage. Generally speaking , if I can inport teh wav BT into pro tools and export final "audio" project out as WAv, then upload it to internet , FB or YT. Is taht better than using MP3 ? or does FB and YT apply their own compression ?

[Darryl Ramm]

Read my previous post. Without knowing bit depth, sample rate and CODEC it is not possible to answer thus question.

OK

[Craig F]

No lossy compression sounds as good a full PCM WAV code

this video is the missing audio between a wav file and a 320 mp3 of it http://io9.com/listen-to-all-the-stu...out-1686279060

[Darryl Ramm]

Yes if you have Uncompressed PCM in the WAV file and are talking similar bit depths and sample rates.

We have no idea of the provenance of these files. The backing track WAV file might be 24 bit, 96KHz uncompressed PCM, it might be 32kHz, 14 bit compressed with a lossy CODEC. So instead of guessing and talking about audio file container formats how about describing the actual audio data available, then a useful comparison can be made. And yes I have seen some very awful whacky WAV files... even though many folks will assume uncompressed PCM when talking WAV files.

But even simpler than CODEC are the bit depth and audio sample rate (not the bitrate) even in the same ball park?