Musicians Collaboration Studio
How To => File Formats => Topic started by: NickT on March 06, 2006, 11:11:24 PM
-
It seems we have figured out many things about music file types. I think if we can stick to a standard, it will help us all.
- WMA: We have found that mp3 adds a little dead air to the beginning of a file. Wma does not. So this is the preferred file format for "working" files. Of course if you use Mac...we will have to play with the mp3 file to line it up.
- APE:This is monkey audio's lossless file format. This is a good compression format that will keep your tracks sounding great. We mix to wav...then compress to ape and post. Works great for your finished tracks.
I will provide a better list but here are some links:
- http://www.dbpoweramp.com/dmc.htm (http://www.dbpoweramp.com/dmc.htm)
- http://www.dbpoweramp.com/codec-central.htm (http://www.dbpoweramp.com/codec-central.htm)
These should get you started!
-
Nick
Don't forget us Mac users - APE files aren't so useful. And, although I can convert WMA files for use in Cubase, I can't export them. So, MP3 is my chosen format, until there's an easier way.
Maybe that's why I'm a lyric writer! ;D
Andy
-
Nick
Don't forget us Mac users - APE files aren't so useful. And, although I can convert WMA files for use in Cubase, I can't export them. So, MP3 is my chosen format, until there's an easier way.
Maybe that's why I'm a lyric writer! ;D
Andy
You are right Andy...
If you are a MAC user...AIFF or WAV for your final tracks...we will just deal with the size.
Thanks!
-
...AIFF or WAV for your final tracks...we will just deal with the size.
Thanks!
I believe file size is not the only consideration. I think the file transfer speed can be an issue for some users. It's safe to say that in the coming years, transfer speeds will continue to increase. The problem will slowly go away.
If it's going to be OK to put wavs up, I'm all for that. I'd rather see good use of wavs vs. poorly converted ape files. By that, I'm talking about mono wav files converted into stereo ape files, or even mono source files rendered as stereo files. That is a total waste of system resources and bandwidth.
-
Hmmm I've probably done this everytime... I'll have to be more careful
If it's going to be OK to put wavs up, I'm all for that. I'd rather see good use of wavs vs. poorly converted ape files. By that, I'm talking about mono wav files converted into stereo ape files, or even mono source files rendered as stereo files. That is a total waste of system resources and bandwidth.
-
I think Ootle zips wav files. What do you think about that?
-
Just zipping wavs degrades the audio...
-
Just zipping wavs degrades the audio...
I don't believe that's true. Where did you learn that - can you point me to a link or something?
-
I understand that flac is an alternative.
Granted, I continue to use .ape Simply because it works, and, I've not had occasion to need to change. But, I understand flac is Mac compatible. And, supports 24bit
Then, I could be wrong... Anyone had any experience with it.. I do know that someone asked me to consider it once before. But, can't remember who..
Just a thought....
BW@
-
I always though it was general knowledge in the audio community, I remember people telling me from audio lists & sites I've been on not to do it.. and I rarely see zipped wav's
but I'm just going by what I thought true, looks like I might be wrong.. (googled it)
Ray
Just zipping wavs degrades the audio...
I don't believe that's true. Where did you learn that - can you point me to a link or something?
-
Nick
Don't forget us Mac users - APE files aren't so useful. And, although I can convert WMA files for use in Cubase, I can't export them. So, MP3 is my chosen format, until there's an easier way.
Maybe that's why I'm a lyric writer! ;D
Andy
Just a thought about something that I know nothing about, (Oxymoron or just plain moron). :P
Gerk has posted several times on CC about a fix for .wma's for Macs.
-
Zipping or raring or whatever else doesn't lose quality, have you guys lost a bit of a program when zipped it, i did not, so why should it lose with audio files?.... Anyway I've tried and it it works and one advantage over apes is that it works with 24bit files.
-
Forgive me if I'm wrong. But I ape 24bit files and they uncompress to 24bit.
Nick
-
Zipping does not alter the data. only compresses (makes a smaller binary) and uncompresses it (restores the original binary).
I usually APE 16-bit 44.1 just because 24-bit files are 50% larger than 16-bit and my Roadrunner upload sucks. Downloads are no problem though and when I really ahve to upload something large, I do it somewhere else (i.e., not at home).
Mp3's will alter the audio (it is not lossless). I would like to dig into the issue of "dead space" and all a little more though. I haven't seen the problem myself so I wonder if its due to a specific codec? I use lame.exe (v3.93, command line version, http://lame.sourceforge.net/). what is everyone else using?
-
Forgive me if I'm wrong. But I ape 24bit files and they uncompress to 24bit.
Nick
Hmmm, Nick. Maybe you have some other codecs. It looks like I can ape 24bit files, but when going o unape them, it doesn't work. I've seen this problem in some other forums, can you check what you're saying? Because if that's true, you are the first one I know that can do that.
-
I am using version 3.9.9.0 of the codec and it will convert 24bit..
I seem to remember some time last year, that we had a situation in my studio where folks all of a sudden were having problems opening ape files. What happened, is one of us had installed a new version of MA, without knowing it was new. And, there was some incompatibility with the old version results....
If you have been using it for a long time I'd suggest you update, and pass the word...
BW@
-
Mp3's will alter the audio (it is not lossless). I would like to dig into the issue of "dead space" and all a little more though. I haven't seen the problem myself so I wonder if its due to a specific codec? I use lame.exe (v3.93, command line version, http://lame.sourceforge.net/). what is everyone else using?
interesting... you may be on to something. is your OS Windows? i've been using the codec that came with the multitrack software and it adds the 127ms or so. think i'll try the Lame codec.
fwiw, the space isn't noticeable unless you zoom way in, but being a drummer you'd likely hear it. course it'll only cause trouble if your sending out an mp3 for others to track to and subsequently loading their new tracks into your original project. if you're only adding tracks to someone else's bed, then it's not an issue.
would you mind converting a small wav to mp3 and then posting the mp3? here's the wav:
http://www.letiziamusic.com/audio/test18Mar2006letizia.WAV (http://www.letiziamusic.com/audio/test18Mar2006letizia.WAV)
-
Hi !
one question...maybe there's an answer somewhere in all threads but don't have the time to browse !
about this comment and uploaded files.
"Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached"
Does this mean that the file I have uploaded is completely deleted from the server if I uncheck it when modifying my post ?
Or is there another way to delete an uploaded file.....
okay there's an option to delete but does'nt that mean that I delete the whole post if I click at that option ?
thanks
SpaceCube
-
Juhani,
about this comment and uploaded files.
"Uncheck the attachments you no longer want attached"
Does this mean that the file I have uploaded is completely deleted from the server if I uncheck it when modifying my post ?
Or is there another way to delete an uploaded file.....
okay there's an option to delete but does'nt that mean that I delete the whole post if I click at that option ?
That is correct...If you want to save the post but not the file...just un-attach the file..it will delete from the server and make room.
Nick
-
Thank you Nick ! :)
-
I can ape and un-ape to the same thing all the time...just tested.
If you select Wave
Bits as source
Feq as Source
Channels as source
It will uncompress to the original file. Now if someone aped to 16...it will open to 16. So you have to be careful as to what you ape to. 24 to 24...and so on.
Nick
PS...Learjeff told me about that!
-
+1 24/48 no prob..
Ray
-
would you mind converting a small wav to mp3 and then posting the mp3? here's the wav:
http://www.letiziamusic.com/audio/test18Mar2006letizia.WAV (http://www.letiziamusic.com/audio/test18Mar2006letizia.WAV)
tried to download it, but getting a 404 error--maybe you took the file down already?
Mike
-
sorry bout that Mike. recently changed servers... file got overlooked in the shuffle.
it's there now
http://www.letiziamusic.com/audio/test18Mar2006letizia.WAV (http://www.letiziamusic.com/audio/test18Mar2006letizia.WAV)
thanks
-
Ok, here's a 192Kbps mp3 made with lame 3.93 (not the most current build but works for me).
Mike
-
thanks Mike. turns out your conversion adds approximately 51ms of space to the beginning of the file. fwiw, it also adds around 25ms of space to the end of the file. btw, are you on a Windows pc?
i'd like to get one of the Mac guys to convert the same Wav file to mp3. any takers? Gerk?
http://www.letiziamusic.com/audio/test18Mar2006letizia.WAV (http://www.letiziamusic.com/audio/test18Mar2006letizia.WAV)
-
Yep glad to try this out. This has long been puzzling me too. I can try a couple of different methods to MP3 it as well and we'll see what happens.
Mark
-
Here it is encoded with a (slightly older) version of LAME on latest OSX.
Mark
-
My tests show, for 2 different versions of LAME that they both did indeed add time to the file.
WAV: 0:14:86 seconds
MP3: 0:14:94 seconds
So not the same amount of time added as with Mike's version of LAME. I want to dig into this some as well.
For the sake of information, I tried 2 different methods for making the MP3. One was with a project called LameBrain (OSX LAME front end, very nice actually), using LAME version 3.95
The second I did from Digital Performer (my DAW software) using the LAME framework (osx system level addon). It seems older ... doesn't include version information with it, but the header (lame.h) seems to be from Dec 2003.
Mark
-
ok, just found the answers for this one. This is apparently expected behaviour of ALL the MP3 encoders and decoders out there from what I've just read. It also explains some of the timing differences between Mike's and my mp3 tests (older versions of LAME added more padding).
It's a bit technical, but check it all out here:
http://lame.sourceforge.net/tech-FAQ.txt
Sadly I don't think there would be any sort of easy fix to any of this. This extra space is needed for several reasons (explained in that faq). Also with different versions of LAME, and with different encoders/decoders the appended and prepended samples can't be properly predicted, so there's no real way of "fixing" something like this. Also with different bitrates and encoding options the amount of padding required can change as well.
Now after all these explanations, it really makes me wonder if WMA doesn't also pad both ends of a file... it almost seems like for a compressed format it would be required.
Anyone wanna test this? ;) I can't really encode wma on OSX properly.
Mark
-
One more thing .... I also just tried exporting the converted MP3 as wav, and it shrunk back down (some0, but not back to the original size:
orig wav: 0:14:86
exported wav: 0:14:91
So it came back to within 5ms. Interesting. Going to test on other applications as well, the above one was done with Audacity.
Exdporting with my DAW (Digital Performer), gives me:
exported wav: 0:14:94
Moral of the story, MP3's are evil timing wise without a doubt LOL.
Mark
-
Gerk,
good info. thanks for digging even deeper!
for fun, I just converted a 16/44.1 WAV to APE (extra high) and then back to WAV. I did a binary file compare (fc.exe on WinXP) and it came back with two bytes changed, and reported that the original file was longer...
00000004: F4 1E
00000005: 21 22
I'm guessing (from the early line #'s) its something in the header though so maybe harmless.
Mike
-
thanks Mark and Mike!
sure, i'll try wav to wma and see what it does.
i was at http://lame.sourceforge.net/ (same site Mark posted) last week... part of starting to research sound quality of various mp3 converters, as well as other formats. somehow landed on a forum dedicated to the same...
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=idx (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?act=idx)
specifically...
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?s=0959a5fa4d98c958380b46def9fc3cc7&showtopic=21904 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?s=0959a5fa4d98c958380b46def9fc3cc7&showtopic=21904)
-
Gerk,
good info. thanks for digging even deeper!
for fun, I just converted a 16/44.1 WAV to APE (extra high) and then back to WAV. I did a binary file compare (fc.exe on WinXP) and it came back with two bytes changed, and reported that the original file was longer...
00000004: F4 1E
00000005: 21 22
I'm guessing (from the early line #'s) its something in the header though so maybe harmless.
Mike
I've tried this before, along with a test of the original and encoded/dcoded out of phase with each other. I used the *nix binary compare (cmp) and they came out identical for me.
Mark
-
For the mac users who want to remain compliant with the windows users and one another for that matter, I suggest MAX which can be found http://sbooth.org/Max/ (http://sbooth.org/Max/) from the MAX developer page :: Max can generate audio in over 20 compressed and uncompressed formats including MP3, Ogg Vorbis, FLAC, AAC, Apple Lossless, Monkey's Audio, Speex, AIFF, and WAVE.
-
Wow, this looks super cool :)
Max is an odd name to choose for an audio product though ... at first I thought you might have been talking about this max (Max/MSP): http://www.cycling74.com/products/maxmsp
Mark
-
When I first found MAX, I too thought it a strange name to utilize, especially with the popularity of cycling74 / Max/MSP! I'm a Pluggo owner / user and very familiar with cycling74, speaking of I also use PD = Pure Data. I hope that MAX performs as we expect & need it to.
-
It looks pretty interesting so far. Not impressed with the interface though. It would be great if we could have designated types of encoding/decoding, or maybe a prompt to choose which type. It seems like you have to set the preferences manually each time you want to do a different type of encoding. Looks great for batch jobs and cd ripping though :)
I've had great luck using the latest CocoaMonkey so far, have never had compatability issues with anyone to date.
Mark
-
I didn't even know there was a CocoaMonkey going to google it in a sec, yet before i do let me state, "I agree with you, it would be better if you didn't have to manually adjust preference settings & could do it via the interface."
-
In this topic, the main problem we're faced with (for the collaborating musician / engineer / producer) is download speed. This is what we all know makes compression utilities an absolute must for those with low bandwidth. However, it's purely a matter of personal preference as to which format one opts for when collaborating. Personally, my argument for using the native files (WAV / AIFF) stands on this basic foundation: If you're able to make the native file (WAV / AIFF) available, then do so because it's ultimately the best solution for the mix engineer. If people can only work with compressed files due to bandwidth limitations, then that's the way to go for them. I would not criticise in any way. It's just a matter of finding a common agreement / solution between one another for providing master tracks that will allow the mix to be given its best chance possible for maximum sound quality. I generally work with the native files only and steer clear of the small compressed ones because I don't belieive in "tampering" (converting) just for the sake of quicker download times. Why convert something "down" - only to convert it back "up" again ? I think that's a step best left out to avoid chances of conversion errors. Having said that, I can confirm that ZIP and RAR are exceptionally good packaging tools. I've often received a whole project as several ZIP / RAR packages (i.e., for Drums, Guitars, Keyboards etc, etc) and they are very clean when expanded. For those of you who use Cubase, Steinberg do not have any recorded issues with ZIP files in Cubase projects. Unfortunately, I've had lots of problems with APE files [bad conversions] and they've generally been more trouble than they're worth. So, we see particular groups of guys and girls working more and more with each other when they establish a common way of working. This applies equally to native file users - or compression fans. That's just a little bit of insight into the way I see things, the way I work - and why I like to work that way :)
Rab 8)
-
As you probably know I'm a big Wavpack proponent. I've send several people self extracting wavpack files and not only were there no problems but it elimitated a bunch of mouse clicks :D MAX now has wavpack support. Why people still use ape is beyond me.
-
Cause I don't use MAX :D LOL
The music community is traditionally really slow at adopting new stuff ... I know a lot of folk that still won't use any kind of compression (aside from zipping wavs).
Mark
-
http://www.sharebig.com/ 1.5 gig transfer, so signing in... See what you think.
Send the whole damn thing! Why not? Wavepack is a good compression, plus they give you the option to keep all of the bits that have been cut in a separate file. You can put them back together on the other end. I used this program when it was first compiled, great piece of code.
I have never really liked MP3 anyway, but it is such a standard you just have to get used to it for now until Steinberg decides to pull his patent trick, which will happen I believe. I've gotten way better compression ratio results with wma, no doubt. Getting below 128 on an MP3 is really risky, but I have done the low 50's with a wma and it sounded good enough to pass. An MP3 at the bitrate is atrocious!
To master I would prefer two things. 1.) A fully mixed wave file and 2.) A separate vocal track. Reason? Musicians record like musicians. 9 out of 10 times they bury the vocals. I can dig them out, but it's a bitch! So if I am mastering a track recorded by a musician rather than a vocalist, I always ask for that separate track. I have developed a method to master an MP3 also. If the mix is true to the harmonics and is a fair representation of what they want to be, I can polish it up on the backside.
I know, I talk too much ;)
-
Krisus -
The Sharebig site looks like the ads are on the download side of things. Good find, I think. :)
We have been doing pretty well with the files in the thread. But you can do things how you see fit.
Thanks,
Nick
-
That's cool. I mention this from a mastering point of view. That is how I look at recordings. Of course I think we all would want our finished product as dynamic as possible. I haven't used that file transfer thing yet, I just recently found it. Have no idea if it's good or not.
-
I know this thread has been dead for over a year but I thought it was worth digging up... >:D
The main reason is because a year has gone by since the last post and I've been using Sonar 7 a while now which can export directly to FLAC. Now I like FLAC , it's alot more freely licensed than monkeys audio, which I guess is why it's turned up in Sonar. It also seems to be embedded in alot of portable audio devices, is Mac compatable, and is commonly used in linux distributions.
Does anyone know if it's an export option in any other DAW's , the wind seems to be blowing in Flacs direction as the most popular lossless audio codec recently, I wonder if the time time has come when it's easier to switch than stick with apes ? I like that I can just play them from media player or on my portable player without conversion , and I now love being able to export them directly without the need to transcode them in wavelab.
CosmicD
-
I think it's all on personal preference. I dig on wavpack but for me it all depends on whos getting the track. It seems that the flac people also like wavpack http://flac.sourceforge.net/comparison.html.
-
In the end game as long as it's truly lossless, doesn't pad the audio and I can decode it it's good for me :) The options get better all the time.
None of the Mac OSX DAWs I work with directly export into any of these formats from my experience to date (I haven't looked that hard though, so don't hold me to that one). I'm a bit oldschool, I still usually output a mix as AIFF for preview purposes, then encode it after the fact anyway so it's just a different option to select for the encoding tool of choice :)
Mark
-
In the end game as long as it's truly lossless, doesn't pad the audio and I can decode it it's good for me :) The options get better all the time.
None of the Mac OSX DAWs I work with directly export into any of these formats from my experience to date (I haven't looked that hard though, so don't hold me to that one). I'm a bit oldschool, I still usually output a mix as AIFF for preview purposes, then encode it after the fact anyway so it's just a different option to select for the encoding tool of choice :)
Mark
Can we make it so we can post Flacs if we want as we can't at the moment. I think Wavpack is good but isn't gaining the widespread support of FLAC, it has alot of mediaplayers , hardware ( http://flac.sourceforge.net/links.html#hardware ) ,and now it seems Daw's starting to support it, I know it's got support in Reaper , and Ableton 5 , as well as Sonar 7, it's just so much easier to bounce straight from the DAW and either post it or put on my portable player...If you have an Ipod you can use the Rockbox firmware update to give you Flac support too.
http://www.rockbox.org/
CosmicDolphin
-
What are the file extensions associated with flac? Also, just FYI, you can post anything at all, if you zip it first ;)
-
What are the file extensions associated with flac? Also, just FYI, you can post anything at all, if you zip it first ;)
Just .FLAC as far as I know..... or .ZIP if you zip it afterwards >:D
CosmicD
-
I noticed that we can post .anl files from Har-Bal , has anyone made a thread with some on ??
It would be a useful resource to collect them together for different types of well known songs.
CD
-
I noticed that we can post .anl files from Har-Bal , has anyone made a thread with some on ??
It would be a useful resource to collect them together for different types of well known songs.
CD
I think 4 or 5 of us use Har-Bal. I remember adding anl files when Curtis and I were comparing mixes one time.
I have so many reference files now, I don't know what do with them.
I am all for collecting some good styles and making a nice library of them.
Nick
-
I've got a few I made from commercial tracks , they make good references when mixing , but since I joined the MC I've ended up mixing styles where I don't have any proper Cd's to compare to, so a library of classics would be a really useful resource.
CosmicD
-
I usually listen to the song and then find what I think is similar or ask the member who they think it sounds like. I then dig up a similar tune for reference.
I try not to change to much in har-bal. Just even it out a little.
I will make a new thread and we can start making a nice reference library.
Nick
-
Excellent....I'll post a few up when it's done
-
So what is the consensus on har-bal, what do you all think? Is all of the eq done visually without playback? Can anyone post before and after? I'd love to hear someone who gave their best shot at a mix that sounded pretty good on its own, and then run it through har-bal and post both. Possibly post multiple attempts at different eq curve solutions from har-bal.
Also, is there a demo version?
Thanks,
Marc
-
So what is the consensus on har-bal, what do you all think? Is all of the eq done visually without playback? Can anyone post before and after? I'd love to hear someone who gave their best shot at a mix that sounded pretty good on its own, and then run it through har-bal and post both. Possibly post multiple attempts at different eq curve solutions from har-bal.
Also, is there a demo version?
Thanks,
Marc
I think the consensus is it's a great learning tool that can also be used to polish or sometimes if necessary to rescue a track.
The eq is done with ears and eyes you can see and hear what you've done but also A/B it with loudness compensation, otherwise the brain tricks us into thinking the louder one is better. Takes a bit of getting your head around at first.
There's quite a number of tracks here treated with it...but if you wanna post a mix up I can run it through for you.
There is a demo but I think it's only 8 bit
CD
-
Hey Marc,
Har-Bal is cool in low quantities.
It is great for checking a mix to see if anything is way out of line. I used to really tweak things in har-bal before hitting it with the final comps and limiter.
Now I use it more checking a mix, and then trying to fix the offending eq in the mix. I also use it for shelving.
Really handy when trying to clean up a muddy mix. The pro's hate it. Just google it and see what the prosound gang have to say.
But it has really helped me. I suppose you could do the same thing using a spectral graph of the music. But Har-Bal is easier. And you can save your finale eq "Filter".
Nick
-
8 bit!?! Where do I sign up??
Thanks for the input though, it's good to hear it from people who've really tried it.
Thx!
Marc
-
More importantly have they released the OSX version yet? grrrr hehe.
-
So we can use wave instead of ape right? My software doesn't support ape.
-
So we can use wave instead of ape right? My software doesn't support ape.
What you using ?
-
audacity
-
audacity
You can export to wav and then use monkeys audio to convert the wave to ape....or from ape back to wav if you need to.
www.monkeysaudio.com
-
Yes that's my workflow here. I export a wav and then re-compress as an ape. Getting ape files it's the other way around, download the ape file, de-compress into a wav, load into DAW.
Mark
-
Live & Learn,
I had no idea that my mono bass tracks were being converted to stereo by the .ape files I upload. Is there a way to prevent that?
I was browsing here to see why my uploads weren't going throuh today. ;D
-
Live & Learn,
I had no idea that my mono bass tracks were being converted to stereo by the .ape files I upload. Is there a way to prevent that?
I was browsing here to see why my uploads weren't going throuh today. ;D
Hey Preston
Are you sure they are getting converted to stereo when they are turned into apes? It's likely that they are getting turned into stereo when you export them ... the default for most DAW's is to output to a stereo bus when exporting, so you might want to double check that you are in fact exporting mono files :)
Mark
-
Live & Learn,
I had no idea that my mono bass tracks were being converted to stereo by the .ape files I upload. Is there a way to prevent that?
I was browsing here to see why my uploads weren't going throuh today. ;D
Changing them to ape files wouldn't convert them to stereo
-
Guys - I found out yesterday that Adobe Audition CC opens .apes in your mac :) (prolly in Windows too)
You can then render wav, mp or whatever suitable to your DAW :)
Cheers!
-
I know this is a very old post, but I've been using MP3 for years for uploading/downloading, and I've never had any problems with syncing in a DAW, that's why I use Cakewalk Sonar X3 PE, for some reason, I think it converts the MP3 back in to wav, granted, music producers would prefer raw WAV, and so do I for uploading seps, or for mixing seps, but for general mixdowns I always use MP3, as long as I keep the sample rate at 44100Hz, and the bit rate as 32 bit, and using all defaults for the MP3 conversion, I don't hear any difference between MP3 or WAV, the only visual, difference is the file size. For uploading, MP3 is much faster, and many times I've tried WAV and even though the file size can be quite large for a 3-4 minute song, uploading large files can be and are subject to transfer errors, and failed uploads, hence the need to use MP3 for uploading.
-
I know this is a very old post, but I've been using MP3 for years for uploading/downloading, and I've never had any problems with syncing in a DAW, that's why I use Cakewalk Sonar X3 PE, for some reason, I think it converts the MP3 back in to wav, granted, music producers would prefer raw WAV, and so do I for uploading seps, or for mixing seps, but for general mixdowns I always use MP3, as long as I keep the sample rate at 44100Hz, and the bit rate as 32 bit, and using all defaults for the MP3 conversion, I don't hear any difference between MP3 or WAV, the only visual, difference is the file size. For uploading, MP3 is much faster, and many times I've tried WAV and even though the file size can be quite large for a 3-4 minute song, uploading large files can be and are subject to transfer errors, and failed uploads, hence the need to use MP3 for uploading.
Sorry but you are incorrect, it's been documented multiple times here..if you send an MP3 to another musician for tracking pusposes when you get that part back it it won't line up properly with what you have in your own DAW. The MP3 process adds padding bits which will throw timing off by a random number of milliseconds, it's a known part of the MP3 file format design.
It's more apparent on stuff like drums where it can throw the feel of the track off but the internet is so fast these days I can upload a wav faster than I used to an MP3 10 yrs ago
-
We have also determined that the windows .wma does not add any time to the file.
-
We have also determined that the windows .wma does not add any time to the file.
Correct. WMA doesn't pad the frames like MP3 does (but it does make it more complicated for people who don't use windows as it's a pretty unfriendly format outside of windows). It probably depends on what you're doing and how picky you are about it. Lots of people do use MP3 and don't notice any differences. You can always try and manually re-shift all the content back to the proper spot after the fact (once you've converted to a format that allows it), but unless you've got sync markers or a good click up front of every track that can be pretty painful too.