mp3 to wav to mp3 to wav same? |
mp3 to wav to mp3 to wav same? |
Feb 27 2003, 14:42
Post
#1
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 10 Joined: 27-February 03 Member No.: 5219 |
If a file is encoded to mp3, then coverted back to a wav, and then that wav is convered back to mp3, will the both mp3s be the same?
|
|
|
|
![]() |
Aug 21 2003, 02:13
Post
#2
|
|
|
Group: Members Posts: 4 Joined: 21-August 03 Member No.: 8456 |
Not to resurrect a dead thread or anything, but it does seem to be the most appropriate place for the question. (If it's not, please forgive me
I understand the reasoning why re-encoding is still a lossy process, but I've always been curious about the following idea(s): Assuming mp3 encoding, in it's basic form consists of 2 steps (I'm not too well versed in the nitty gritty of encoding, so don't hessitate to correct me where I'm wrong Could it not be possible than to design some sort of method to *insert* the decoded wave, back into the encode process, *after* the "throwing away" / alteration point, so that this wave (which has already undergone this process, in it's original encoding) can now undergo the same lossless compression. There by getting it back to it's "original" mp3 encoded state? And in a somewhat related manner: Is the mp3 decode process, reversable? Ie. Is there an inverse algorithm that can be used to take a decoded waveform, and reconstruct the mp3 that generated it. (Obviously knowing all the original encoding conditions). Not encoding in the traditional sense, merely an "undoing" of whatever the decode process did. Of course, I am by no means saying these things are possible, I'm merely curious about the ideas Thanks in advance, Aggies |
|
|
|
gts mp3 to wav to mp3 to wav same? Feb 27 2003, 14:42
CiTay No. MP3 encoding is a lossy process. The WAV that ... Feb 27 2003, 14:46
gts Well the first conversion from wav to mp3 removes ... Feb 27 2003, 15:05
Xenion QUOTE (gts @ Feb 27 2003 - 03:05 PM)Well the ... Feb 27 2003, 15:15
X-Fixer QUOTE (gts @ Feb 27 2003 - 09:05 PM)Well the ... Feb 27 2003, 15:26
gts QUOTE theoretically this could work this way. (sec... Feb 27 2003, 23:30
gts QUOTE original wav => mp3 =lossy
agreed
QUOTE m... Feb 27 2003, 23:33
Messer Codec does not remove anything. It rounds some val... Feb 27 2003, 23:39
gts Thank you.
What search words will find the topic?
... Feb 27 2003, 23:43
Mac I'll chip in because it took me a few goes of ... Feb 27 2003, 23:46
Messer I'd try "reencoding".
This is for e... Feb 27 2003, 23:49
gts Thank you! Feb 28 2003, 00:01
CiTay QUOTE Codec does not remove anything. It rounds so... Feb 28 2003, 00:21
gts QUOTE It doesn't care if the WAV was previousl... Feb 28 2003, 00:30
Messer QUOTE (CiTay @ Feb 28 2003 - 01:21 AM)QUOTE C... Feb 28 2003, 00:35
gts QUOTE that essential process in lossy compression ... Feb 28 2003, 00:37
fewtch There's a simple way to test this. Encode a .... Feb 28 2003, 00:42
Artemis3 If you record a CD into a cassette tape, then use ... Feb 28 2003, 02:14
gts QUOTE If you record a CD into a cassette tape, the... Feb 28 2003, 02:29
rjamorim QUOTE (gts @ Feb 27 2003 - 08:30 PM)In the jp... Feb 28 2003, 02:39
gts QUOTE But reducing the amount of colors is only ON... Feb 28 2003, 02:44
rjamorim QUOTE (gts @ Feb 27 2003 - 10:44 PM)but the p... Feb 28 2003, 03:05
andrew3199 I think we can all agree that there is some loss w... Feb 28 2003, 04:29
rjamorim QUOTE (andrew3199 @ Feb 28 2003 - 12:29 AM)fo... Feb 28 2003, 04:36
dreamliner77 QUOTE I perceived the decay of plucked notes on an... Feb 28 2003, 05:19
makarov An analogy to JPEG lossy image compression was mad... Jan 30 2005, 07:33
NeoRenegade gts, with regards to your JPEG analogy... you refe... Mar 2 2003, 23:14
kdo QUOTE (rjamorim @ Feb 28 2003 - 03:05 AM)Code... Mar 3 2003, 00:37
Doctor aggies: no.
Lossy sound encoding is not like you ... Aug 21 2003, 02:54
phong An interesting thought, but probably academic. MP... Aug 21 2003, 02:58
AtaqueEG QUOTE (dreamliner77 @ Feb 27 2003, 11:19 PM)R... Aug 21 2003, 03:18
2Bdecided QUOTE (aggies11 @ Aug 21 2003, 01:13 AM)Could... Aug 21 2003, 10:33
2Bdecided In reply to the original question, the simplistic ... Aug 21 2003, 10:39
sld (Redundant post, sorry) Aug 21 2003, 10:40
Vietwoojagig I remember long time ago, there was a technology c... Aug 21 2003, 12:53
2Bdecided DCC used (what would become) MPEG-1 layer I.
You ... Aug 21 2003, 13:24
aggies11 Thanks for the quick replies. Very informative ind... Aug 21 2003, 17:06
phong The answer to the first question is "no... Aug 21 2003, 19:29
Doctor Yawn.
phong: I think you are wrong on both counts... Aug 22 2003, 03:29
phong I think I mis-specified which questions I was answ... Aug 22 2003, 03:46
Canar QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Aug 21 2003, 01:33 AM)I do... Aug 22 2003, 04:08
bexx Isn't wavpacklossy/hybrid whatever its called ... Aug 22 2003, 04:29
sublimelouie easiest way to think of it, its like xeroxing a xe... Aug 22 2003, 04:51
aggies11 Sublime:
easiest way to think of it, its like xero... Aug 22 2003, 05:26
2Bdecided This reply is in response to no one in particular.... Aug 22 2003, 11:05
Gabriel QUOTE IIRC FhG looked at this. You could call it a... Aug 22 2003, 11:23
smg QUOTE (2Bdecided @ Aug 22 2003, 06:05 AM)This... Aug 22 2003, 14:46
phong QUOTE Do it enough, you can reduce the complexity ... Aug 22 2003, 16:13
ErikS QUOTE (Gabriel @ Aug 22 2003, 11:23 AM)Now, t... Aug 22 2003, 16:50
Zilva Cosine transformation is NOT LOSSY. After transofm... Sep 10 2003, 10:06
tigre QUOTE (Zilva @ Sep 10 2003, 01:06 AM)Cosine t... Sep 10 2003, 10:35
2Bdecided QUOTE (Zilva @ Sep 10 2003, 09:06 AM)Cosine t... Sep 10 2003, 11:11
MugFunky wow.. old post. ("holy thread resurrection, b... Jan 31 2005, 04:06
h.tuehn I don't want to correct anything MugFunky or m... Jan 31 2005, 07:16![]() ![]() |
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 23rd May 2013 - 17:11 |