Is it really worth it?

I have a 320 of a song that I cannot find a better quality version of ANYWHERE.. I have looked for a couple of years, off and on.. It's something I have wanted to take a stab at remixing for a while now, but the quality has always turned me off of it..

This is just one of those tunes that you want to do some justice.. And if it's going to sound degraded and crappy, regardless of MY quality of work, it's not worth it to me..

I am sure a lot of dancefloor/party remixes that get done as a kinda one off probably use 320s for the source material, just wondering if anybody has any input on this..

you could try to kind of re-master it..but you won´t get back what mp3 decoding allready took away.

if you like; you can give me a copy to try out some processing, since i´m gettin´ more and more into mastering, recently...or do it yourself, off course.

cheerz

Really depends on the source material and what you want to do with it...

Its definitely doable. Even if you had a wave 2 track its not like you can take away all the mastering processing (compression, eq, etc) so you might as well have at'er

Is it ACTUALLY going to sound degraded and crappy? I feel like people here are a bit squeamish about anything less than wav. I remixed My Elastic Eye by the Chemical Brothers, which I had a 256k!!!!! mp3 of, and it sounds fine. And I've played it on large systems. Fair enough, it depends on what parts you use and what kind of processing you apply, but I think it's silly to say "I really want to do this remix but I'm not going to because I only have a 320k mp3 of it."

Sorry if it sounds like I'm directing a lot of anger at you in particular (or at anyone, for that matter). I've just noticed a lot of fidgeting about mp3 quality on this board, and this is a convenient time to say something. It really shouldn't be getting in the way of the actual making of music, which I think is priority one around here.

^^^^^^ +1

indeed, give it a shot and see how it turns out, if it really really sucks you can always wait till you find a decent version and substitute it later in the project.

but yeah making the music is the absolute priority and after all its not like we're making pristine and delicate music, it is called glitch hop for a reason. besides tonnes of old school pioneering hip hop sounds shit sonically, but is absolutely epic musically regardless.

my e-40 grapes remix started as a 256k from amazon, as did the savage wayne mash. sometimes you cant find wavs but as long as it sounds good then whatever is clever.

first of all are you saying the 320 you have sounds like shit?
Spend some time EQn' and mastering the track you want to work with, dont just d/l a tune then add layers over the top of it, create a track using the mp3/wav file as an additive to your already existing tune.

just do it, my attitude is if works do it. I have 100's of remixes over the last few years of making beats and those tunes get played out by many on big systems worldwide weather they were made from .wav's or .mp3's.

Just do it!

make music for yourself, if others like then word! if not.. you have created something that puts a smile on your face and probably a few others as well.

dont let some sound quality hold you back from doing what you want, and need to do, to be able to grow as a music producer, even if its just a hobby.

Its been said on here before but I cant find the thread right now. Basically, taking a 256k 320k mp3 whatever, is less of an issue than taking that same compressed file, workin your remix magic then compressing it again. Leave it as a wav when your done, so its only been quantised/compressed once. If you take that same wav (the one you just finished remixing from a 256/320..) and compress it at 320, now its been compressed twice, and not at the same "nodes" essentially making it(the original source material part) of even lesser quality.
Essentially start with 192/256/320, make new jam, render to wav = ok
but start with 192/256/320, make new jam, render to wav, then compress to 320 or lower bad (at least for your original source material) = not so good.
...But this said I have definitely taken a 320 made a new track (example below), compressed to 320, and heard that 320 played on several 10-20k+ soundsystems no prob....but I also wasn't using the low end from the original at all. ex:


Someone please let me know if I am way off or even slightly off on any of this info...

....but even after typing all of this, the best advice so far has been: "Just Do It!"

just give it what it needs; more bass, more punchines, more air, more ambience..the tools are all out there...just do it!

If you really want you can take a high quality track and bounce it to lower quality. Import both into your DAW, flip the phase on one and listen to the difference. This can give you a rough simulation on what is being removed during file compression because the you will be listening to the difference between the two tracks. Then you can judge if the difference is really worth the continued search for a higher quality version of your interested track.