On the topic of cutting 320s, yes I’m sure Dub studio and other cutting houses will do it no prob, but anyone correct me if I’m wrong: won’t there be a significant loudness difference between a wav cut and a 320? Just mathematically you know, if you’re normally cutting wavs (which are 1411 Kbps), theoretically could the volume (or dynamics) difference be enough to notice? It seems to me it would be, but I haven’t done it yet.



I’m still unsure if I want to do acetate or a vinyl dub. I mean I’ll probably just be mixing it at home so?


Vinyl for the durability i would say?


The vinyls are a tiny bit quieter than acetate but they’re lighter and last longer and less fragile, and they do sound great and sometimes beat out actual vinyl records imo, so I would fully recommend them.


from what I gather, acetate works best if you actually play out. But I’m tempted to cut one just to try it


Acetates have a shorter lifespan so i just turn the mixer up if the vinyl dubplate is quieter




Dunno if you’d be able to distinguish it from a flaw in the system on which it was reproduced.


I don’t think it works like that, it’s an analog process (the actual cutting) so the engineer will do whatever he needs to do to get the optimal levels for each track before cutting, regardless of file format.

Compromises on loudness occur when you go over a certain time (length of track) per side because the grooves will have to be tighter, which means the gain has to be reduced.


That makes sense, so the volume of the cut is really at the control of the cutting engineer, I knew that, but I kind of assumed that dynamics would be affected as well.


Maybe, I’m no expert, all i know is that it’s very hard to determine the difference between a 320 and a wav - even for audio ‘pros’, so that would translate to the vinyl cut i would imagine.

I’m getting a 320 cut side by side with wavs on the same plate soon so I’ll report back


Please do, I’m very curious because then I could get some of the older dubs I’ve got cut lol


I failed hard. Got a couple right but mostly it was a wash. lol I guess I lose audio producer points :disappointed_relieved:


Same here. Interestingly enough it seemed that sample-driven music (hip-hop et al.) fucked me up more than acoustic/analog stuff which I tended to get right more often. Makes me wonder if we’re just getting acclimated to the artifacts.


Exactly same thing happened to me. Like I could notice degradation or some difference on the 128s in terms of sibilants being sort of, reduced like on the Coldplay one. But the Jay-Z and Katy Perry tracks were a hard fail lol


CC: @Cheyne_Taylor_Bush

These kind of tests are heavily dependent on what you’re listening with and what converters you are using to actually listen to the samples. A lot of modern consumer-grade A/D/A converters are designed to smooth out artifacting and digital distortion/compression, making the differences harder to hear.

I will say though, I’ve never been able to tell the difference between 320 and WAV personally.


That’s good to know, I always take AD and DA conversion for granted but it’s one of the most important components


Yeah, excellent point. One of the takeaways from years of reading Tape Op is that most people don’t realize how important good converters are both ways.


ur kicked off Material Sound :peel: