[BC] Internet STLs

[Goran Tomas]

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Broadcast List USER
<Broadcast at fetrow.org> wrote:
> I will never understand why people choose to weaken the product by
> going cheap!  This is a choice, and they choose to do it.  MP3s for
> source, stacking codecs, and the Internet for STL are all moves away
> from goodness.
>
> Keep the music at CD quality, not compressed in any way, and have any
> voice tracking done in at least 44.1 kbps 16 bit linear.  TRY to get
> advertisers to supply commercials the same, but I know some want to e-
> mail MP3 files, as do the networks.  Oh, well, it is THIER product.
> Then keep it clean and noise free to the audio processor.  At that
> point, even if you are in a loudness war, it will be better sounding,
> and easier to process than if you start with compromised audio.
>
> In another thread, TSL was discussed.  If you want higher TSL, you
> really need to keep the product clean.

Agreed!

And to offer a possible answers your question - they weaken the
product because they don't know better. Someone told them that MP3s
sound great and nothing's wrong with them. They automatically click
"128 kbps" because "everybody" selects that. A lot of people don't
know at all what bitrate means. They don't understand that editing an
MP3 in something like Audition results in re-encoding and further loss
of quality. They listen to the coded audio on their iSomething player
and since they can't hear anything, they believe there won't be a
difference when played through the whole broadcast chain neither.
Finally, the old time favourite misbelief,  "listeners can't tell the
difference"...

Regards,
Goran Tomas