[QUOTE=Hakita;40707237]It happens because albums in Japan cost a shitload[/QUOTE]
It's true, it costs like 30 USD for a single there, probably 40-50 for an album. Shit's expensive.
[QUOTE=GradionFox;40944839]it costs like 30 USD for a single[/QUOTE]
what?!
[editline]8th June 2013[/editline]
How much do records cost there?
[QUOTE=AK'z;40938521]why would you convert mp3 to alac?[/QUOTE]
because it sounds better?
oh shit i think im in for some boxes now
[QUOTE=Hamsteronfire;40946860]because it sounds better?
oh shit i think im in for some boxes now[/QUOTE]
If it's already mp3 then it's not going to sound better when you convert it to something else you donkey
[QUOTE=Hamsteronfire;40946860]because it sounds better?
oh shit i think im in for some boxes now[/QUOTE]
It really
really
doesn't
[QUOTE=Hamsteronfire;40946860]because it sounds better?[/QUOTE]
[img]http://i121.photobucket.com/albums/o202/akayz_people/Marvin_Gaye--1.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Hakita;40946868]If it's already mp3 then it's not going to sound better when you convert it to something else you donkey[/QUOTE]
*sigh*
[editline]8th June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=AK'z;40946947][img]http://postfiles8.naver.net/20130126_119/philja_1359159802074Navsm_JPEG/Marvin_Gaye-.jpg?type=w2[/img][/QUOTE]
thumb is broken
converting 64kbps mp3 to 320kbps mp3 makes it sound so much better no lies.
[editline]8th June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Hamsteronfire;40946963]
thumb is broken[/QUOTE]
fixed.
if I were to get a pile of junk and turn it into a perfect circle it is still a piece of junk
the same applies for audio bitrates
[QUOTE=AK'z;40946969]converting 64kbps mp3 to 320kbps mp3 makes it sound so much better no lies.[/QUOTE]
i always thought that converting mp3 to alac/flac was just a matter of uncompressing it, not to the degree of the original source, like a cd?
[editline]8th June 2013[/editline]
im left wondering now how i thought my music sounded so good
[QUOTE=Hamsteronfire;40946991]i always thought that converting mp3 to alac/flac was just a matter of uncompressing it, not to the degree of the original source, like a cd?[/QUOTE]
CD > mp3 = compressed from 1411kbps
mp3 > alac/lossless = pointless conversion as when you play it, it already momentarily converts it to WAVE when it plays.
What you tried to do is get better audio quality from thin air. ;)
[QUOTE=Hamsteronfire;40946991]i always thought that converting mp3 to alac/flac was just a matter of uncompressing it, not to the degree of the original source, like a cd?[/QUOTE]
That's not how it works. When you compress an mp3 down, decompressing it to something of a higher quality the sound quality does not increase, I dont know where you got that idea
At every stage, when the sound quality has decreased the only way of really getting it back is to go back to its original stage - this is applicable from the master right down to a 128 kbps
[editline]8th June 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=AK'z;40947008]CD > mp3 = compressed from 1411kbps
mp3 > alac/lossless = pointless conversion as when you play it, it already momentarily converts it to WAVE when it plays.
What you tried to do is get better audio quality from thin air. ;)[/QUOTE]
the point is more that once audio information is lost during conversion it cannot be refound by reconverting upwards, you have to go to the source to get that information back
unless that's what you were saying in which case we're good
[QUOTE=Hamsteronfire;40946991]
im left wondering now how i thought my music sounded so good[/QUOTE]
if you're playing the music on an ipod, it doesn't need to be higher than 256..
[QUOTE=Hamsteronfire;40946991]i always thought that converting mp3 to alac/flac was just a matter of uncompressing it, not to the degree of the original source, like a cd?
[editline]8th June 2013[/editline]
im left wondering now how i thought my music sounded so good[/QUOTE]
placebo lol
[editline]8th June 2013[/editline]
also what ak'z said, higher quality formats are more noticeable with higher quality equipment
you dont need more than 256 on an ipod
v0 master race
When artists put two or more songs on the same track. It's like, you REALLY couldn't have split those up?
you would hate prog rock then
[QUOTE=AK'z;40947023]if you're playing the music on an ipod, it doesn't need to be higher than 256..[/QUOTE]
unless you have a portable amp which overrides the ipod's dac
[QUOTE=Hamsteronfire;40946991]i always thought that converting mp3 to alac/flac was just a matter of uncompressing it, not to the degree of the original source, like a cd?
[editline]8th June 2013[/editline]
im left wondering now how i thought my music sounded so good[/QUOTE]
MP3 is LOSSY compression. You lose data during the compression process. No matter what you do, once that data is lost there is no way to get it back. It's gone. Converting to a better format won't return the lost data.
The music sounding better is probably just a placebo effect from it being a "better sounding" format
[QUOTE=AK'z;30346753]You're a great man.
But you have to spread the heart around, I've made 10 people dizzy already by making them listen to Death Grips. :smug:[/QUOTE]
i saw this post and gave them a listen
first time I've ever heard rap that I didn't even like a little bit :v:
This doesn't happen in many genres I assume, but when purists, people who decide that you can only make X genre of music a certain way, get pissy with other people when they do it a different way. They claim that "It's not true X" and completely ignore it, even though it has musical value.
Also, when people call really lazily made music "Minimalistic"
There is a difference.
standard plastic cd cases
i find card much more appealing
I don't like the standard black edged CD cases of the 90s but some are quite nice indeed.
"lol they don't even play instruments faget lissen 2 real music"
- 14 year old metal fans
Also people who think that "lol go and listen to Justin Beiber" is a proper response to criticism.
people mistaking one genre for another.
stupid people who try to tutor me on genres.
when one artist decides to make his own genre out of an existing genre and his own shitty samples or themes.
"that's not genre, that's french genre"
people discussing which genre is the correct genre, as if they'll ever come to a conclusion.
genres
karate moshers
[QUOTE=Nillor;41073299]people mistaking one genre for another.
stupid people who try to tutor me on genres.
when one artist decides to make his own genre out of an existing genre and his own shitty samples or themes.
"that's not genre, that's french genre"
people discussing which genre is the correct genre, as if they'll ever come to a conclusion.
genres[/QUOTE]
post-popular technical revival rock
[QUOTE=AK'z;41078659]post-popular technical revival rock[/QUOTE]
Well it's not going to be very revival if it's not post-popular
oh man speaking of which revival bands are pretty silly
they can be all right if they're just trying to bring back a certain vibe but put a new vamp on it, or just using a sound from earlier as a starting point and then expanding from there, but when people are praising a band that does nothing but emulate each and every little thing about a sound from 30 years ago - and when they're praised exactly for that reason - it's just... really? nothing different whatsoever? your schtick is that you're shamelessly riding on nostalgia coattails and making it as glaring as you possibly can to invoke recognition? fuck, man
for the above reasons certain pages of the metal thread still have a special place in my hate glands
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
