Copying whitelabel files to iTunes

I´ve got my iTunes set to copy all files to the iTunes folder and organize the file system.

Will the 320 kbps still work when using serato or should i keep a seperate whitelabel folder?

Just tag one of the fields Whitelabel.net and create a smartplaylist so you don't sync those to a iPod or burn to a CD or use them outside of serato.

Yeah, i´ve done that, but i still want iTunes to copy them into my iTunes folder and organize the files.

And also, I´m not always to stoked on the sound even when played in Serato. Theres noise all over the place. Why?

Art's suggestion should still work fine with what you want to do...

Smart idea by the way Art... a lot quicker and easier then what i go through adding those files.

This FAQ explains the audio quality: whitelabel.net

Let us know if you need any more help.

"Editing the tags of a wl.mp3 track in some editors may destroy the high quality audio

Some ID3 tag editors will alter ID3 tags other than the ones you ask them to. This can destroy the high quality portion of the wl.mp3 file. If this happens you will have to download the affected track again."

Is this an issue with the iTunes id3 tagging? I like to edit the tags for easier searching when playing sets.

It's best to be careful when using any editor other than Scratch Live or ITCH.

Try one track first, and if the 320 kbps audio remains when playing in Scratch Live or ITCH you should be good to edit more.

I've never had a single problem with a whitelabel track in iTunes. iTunes organizes those files btw. And, I can rename them all they long.

+1 on both iTunes & Media Monkey, both work fine!!!

OK, theres only two songs that I1ve had problems, but they're old re-releases, so I guess the masters were just noisy in the first place.

And also, I´m not always to stoked on the sound even when played in Serato. There's noise all over the place. Why?

I've noticed the same thing. I've read the link that Dave gave and I've also read up on the Whitelable forum but the problem isn't that the songs are playing at 32kbps in Serato, it's playing in 320kbps it just seems to be a poor quality 320kbps. The Whitelable tracks just don't seem to stand up, sound wise, to my other 320kbps songs that I've downloaded onto my computer from cd's or even the 256kbps AAC files from itunes.

I've tried using the Whitelable songs at gigs but they just sound muddy next to my other tracks. It sounds like the speakers are trying to push the sound through a mattress when I play a Whitelable song.

I get the difference between 32 and 320 and i haven't touched the id3 tags so just as Max asked, why? Is there something I'm missing? I love that we have access to the Whitelable music and it's FREE but if I can't use it in the club what's the point?

Anyone else out there feel this way or do I just need some hearing aids?

BTW, I get that I'm bitching about something that's free, but I'm a cheep bustard.

" It sounds like the speakers are trying to push the sound through a mattress when I play a Whitelable song."

great description... Not for whitelabel tracks but for bad mp3s in general.

Zuck, are you talking about specific tracks? If so, which ones?

In my experience Whitelabel.net tracks sound great when played through supported hardware.

Hey Chris, thanks for checkin in. I feel like pretty much every Whitelable song just doesn't quit have the same sound quality as my other MP3's but maybe I'm wrong. Most MP3's I have, have a broad layered sound and the Whitelable songs seem to be flat but since you say they sound great I'm gonna run an exparament to make sure I'm not just poppin' off.

I've downloaded 5 songs from Whitelabel that I'm going to play side by side with the same songs I have on my computer. A few of the songs are MP3's from my subscription to RPM Top Hits, some are 256 kbps AAC downloads from itunes. I'll make sure the levels match and I'll listen to them through my studio monitors at home plus I'll compare the wave forms. If I can I'll try and see what they sound like side by side at a gig too. I know comparing AAC and MP3 isn't quite the same but this is an experement.

If I can I'll try and compare some Whitelable songs to wav files that I've converted to MP3 and some other 320 MP3 files off of other sites and or subscriptions like Promo Only or Beatport. I'll get back to you on this

Nice one Zuck. I'd be interested to hear the results of your experiments.

The track I'm referring to is Your Love's Got A Hold On Me (Album) by Dennis Brown.

Max, I checked out a few tracks from the Dennis Brown release.

I agree that "Your Love's Got A Hold On Me" isn't the best sounding audio out there but I have no reason to suspect that the Whitelabel audio file is contributing to the situation.

Don't forget that that compilation of tracks dates back to the late 70's and early 80's, and it's often the case that older Jamaican recordings were made on some pretty primitive equipment.

So I reckon that track is OK in terms of it's conversion to a .wl.mp3 file. Any imperfections you're hearing probably go right back to original recordings.

Yeah, Chris, that´s what I was thinking too. And all other releases have good sound, so its probably just a problem with the master tape.

Thanks for checking it out. I´m pretty sure now, that iTunes won´t effect the file when editing tags!