Skip to the article

Looking for SpinZ CZ remixes? Click here

File formats

WAV versus MP3 for mastering

Send a WAV if you have one. But the gap between formats is smaller than people claim, and there is a right way to handle it when the WAV is gone.

An MP3 does not store your song.

It stores a description of your song, and rebuilds something close to it on playback. To keep the file small it throws away the parts it predicts you will not notice, mostly quiet sounds sitting next to loud ones, and everything above a certain frequency.

That is a reasonable trade for listening. It is a worse trade for mastering, because mastering turns things up, and turning up a file means turning up whatever the encoder left behind.

Here is what actually comes off. I took one of my own releases, encoded it, decoded it and measured the result.

Average frequency content of the same master as WAV, 320 kbps MP3 and 128 kbps MP3
The same master, three ways. The 128 kbps encode stops carrying content at about 16.4 kHz. The 320 kbps encode tracks the original up to about 19.8 kHz, close enough that the two lines sit on top of each other for almost the whole range. The file sizes tell the other half of the story: 17.81 MB, 3.71 MB and 1.49 MB.

What this actually means: at 320 kbps the difference is small enough that it will not be the reason your master sounds wrong. At 128 kbps you have lost real content and no amount of mastering brings it back.

Why it matters more for mastering than for listening

You can enjoy a 128 kbps file on a bus. The trouble starts when you process it.

Mastering raises the top end so the song has air. On a WAV there is air to raise. On a 128 kbps file the air was removed, so you are raising the edge of a shelf, which sounds thin and brittle rather than open.

Mastering also compresses, which brings quiet detail up. On a WAV that is room tone and reverb tails. On a heavily encoded file it is the artefacts the encoder left behind, which now become audible where they were hidden before.

And the encoder has already changed the peaks. A decoded MP3 does not have the same waveform as the original, so its peaks sit in different places and often higher. Master it, convert it back to MP3 for release, and you have been through the process twice.

Use this rule: every lossy encode is a one-way door. Two doors is noticeably worse than one, and the second one is the one you can avoid.

What to send when you have the choice

SettingSend thisWhy
FormatWAV or AIFFBoth store the audio as it is. There is no quality difference between them.
Bit depth24-bitMore room at the quiet end than 16-bit, and no practical downside. 32-bit float is fine too if your tool accepts it.
Sample rateWhatever your session isDo not convert. If you worked at 48 kHz, send 48 kHz. Converting adds a step for no benefit.
LevelPeaks below 0 dBFS with room to spareSomewhere around -6 to -3 dBFS is comfortable. The exact number matters far less than not clipping.
LengthThe full song, start to finishInclude the intro and let the ending ring out. Do not trim silence.

One thing not on that list: do not normalize the file before sending it. Normalizing just scales the whole thing up, which removes your headroom and gains you nothing.

Where that file ends up on my own tool.

The SpinZ CZ master page with the upload area for the mix
Drop the WAV, not the MP3.The upload area on the SpinZ CZ master page. The tool measures the file before it moves anything, so what it measures is what it corrects. Hand it an MP3 and it is working on the encoder’s version of your mix rather than your mix. See the tool

These are editorial examples, not endorsements or a buying list. Product names and interface images belong to their respective owners.

When the WAV is gone

It happens. The drive died, the session will not open, the collaborator disappeared, or the song was bounced on a phone three years ago.

Master it anyway. A good master of a 320 kbps file is a real, releasable master. Refusing to work on it does not get the WAV back.

  1. Find the best copy that exists

    Check every drive, email, chat thread and cloud folder. A 320 kbps file and a 128 kbps file sound very different once you process them.

  2. Do not convert it to WAV and pretend

    Converting an MP3 to WAV makes a big file containing exactly the same missing information. It fools the file listing and nothing else.

  3. Master more gently than usual

    Less top end lift, less compression. You are working with less material, so pushing it harder exposes more.

  4. Do not chase the air that is not there

    If the file stops at 16 kHz, adding a high shelf raises hiss and the edge of the shelf. Leave it alone and let the song be a little darker.

  5. Say what it is

    If someone else is mastering it, tell them it came from a lossy file. It changes how they approach it, and it stops them hunting a problem they cannot fix.

What format to release

Give every distributor and platform the highest quality file they accept, which is normally a 16-bit or 24-bit WAV at 44.1 kHz or 48 kHz.

Every service makes its own lossy versions for streaming. They will do that from whatever you give them. Hand them an MP3 and they encode your MP3 again, so listeners get the damage twice.

Keep the WAV master somewhere safe as well. Future you will want it for a video, a sync, a remaster or a vinyl cut, and none of those want an MP3.

Common questions

Can you hear the difference between WAV and 320 kbps MP3?
On most systems, in most listening situations, most people cannot reliably tell them apart. That is a fair reason to release MP3s to listeners. It is not a reason to master from one, because processing exposes differences that plain listening does not.
Is converting MP3 to WAV a good idea before mastering?
It does not restore anything. The result is a larger file containing the same reduced audio. The only time it helps is when a tool refuses to accept MP3 at all.
Does 24-bit make my master sound better than 16-bit?
Not in a way you will hear on a finished, loud master. What it gives you is more room at the quiet end while you work, which is why it is the sensible delivery format.
Should I send 96 kHz if my session is 96 kHz?
Yes, send what you worked at. Do not upsample a 44.1 kHz session to 96 kHz, because that adds nothing and creates an extra conversion.
What about FLAC or ALAC?
Both are lossless, so they contain exactly the same audio as a WAV in a smaller file. If the service accepts them they are perfectly fine to send.
My only file is a YouTube rip. Is it worth mastering?
You can improve it, but manage your expectations. A rip has been encoded at least twice and often normalized as well. Treat it as a demo rather than a release, and go looking harder for the original first.