am i too late
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R32ZeX3SVSY[/media]
[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;34015997]I'm not one, but there isn't an audio engineer on the planet that's worth his/her salt that would tell you "Anything above 350kb/s is unnecessary."[/QUOTE]
Keywords: [B]"AUDIO ENGINEER"[/B]
[QUOTE=Derp Y. Mail;34016475]Keywords: [B]"AUDIO ENGINEER"[/B][/QUOTE]
Not as relevant as you would think. Audio engineer or not, the sound is STILL higher quality.
Maybe this will help you understand where I'm coming from. When I hear someone say something along the lines of "320kb/s MP3 is [U]good enough[/U], unless you're really picky" what I'm really hearing is "It doesn't need to be the best that it can be, so long as it sounds okay."
[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;34016654]Not as relevant as you would think. Audio engineer or not, the sound is STILL higher quality.
Maybe this will help you understand where I'm coming from. When I hear someone say something along the lines of "320kb/s MP3 is [U]good enough[/U], unless you're really picky" what I'm really hearing is "It doesn't need to be the best that it can be, so long as it sounds okay."[/QUOTE]
The quality might be higher, but you have listen really goddamn closely to be able to hear it. Which I doubt anyone in their right mind would do.
[QUOTE=Derp Y. Mail;34016475]Keywords: [B]"AUDIO ENGINEER"[/B][/QUOTE]
AKA a person that actually knows what he/she talks about when it comes to MP3 & similar versus lossless formats.
Also the type of person I'd actually listen to when it comes to what audio equipment that's good and what isn't.
Unlike you.
[editline]2nd January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Derp Y. Mail;34016705]The quality might be higher, but you have listen really goddamn closely to be able to hear it.[B] Which I doubt anyone in their right mind would do.[/B][/QUOTE]
Hello.
The ideal (for me) is buying vinyls that have a code for a digital version as well.
That way I can have the huge artwork and vinyl sound, plus a digital version for my mp3 player/phone.
[QUOTE=Derp Y. Mail;34016773][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism[/url][/QUOTE]
Wrong wiki link
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audiophile[/url]
That's the right one.
I'm saddened by how much CD's are dieing out. Nothing to me matches the experience of going out to buy an album then coming home and sitting on the floor or drawing something while listening to it, it takes you places and its really an entire experience that digital downloads just don't bring forth.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;34014816]You know you can go to your purchase history and then redownload any album that you've bought before without buying it again, right?[/QUOTE]
Except you can't. iTunes specifically has a warning message telling you if your download stops you'll have to rebuy, so back up.
[QUOTE=Shibbey;34016868]Except you can't. iTunes specifically has a warning message telling you if your download stops you'll have to rebuy, so back up.[/QUOTE]
You're talking about older iTunes policies. They've changed some key things over the years.
[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;34011720]not worth the server space and bandwidth[/QUOTE]
Uh, yes it is.
How can you say otherwise? It's uncompressed, it's a higher quality and will benefit for audiophiles and just people that generally bother getting soundcards and a decent speaker setup.
And whilst they are a minority, there is still a lot of them. And just denying people the better product because most people will satisfy with a lesser product is just greedy and is one of those reasons that causes people to not buy their products, not the other way around.
Maybe they're saving it as a marketing trick
"Now our tracks are in even higher quality!"
And sell it for higher prices
[QUOTE=supercopter;34016251]No but. [B]Adele[/B],Bruno Mars,Rihanna,Lady Gaga,Jessie J and Ed Sheeran are shit.[/QUOTE]
I can't say I like Adele's style of music, but I can't Deny she has a lovely signing voice.
[quote][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYEDA3JcQqw[/media][/quote]
[QUOTE=Van-man;34011299]Why aren't they offering their tracks as FLAC files without any from of DRM?
:saddowns:[/QUOTE]
because flacs are way too big for most people's needs
[QUOTE=stepat201;34013331]If facepunch's general taste in music was all that was available on the market, record sales would hit an all time low of about 100 sales.[/QUOTE]
yeah I don't think deathcore and MLP dubstep remixes are representative of the current trend in popular music
[editline]2nd January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=dgg;34017746]Uh, yes it is.
How can you say otherwise? It's uncompressed, it's a higher quality and will benefit for audiophiles and just people that generally bother getting soundcards and a decent speaker setup.
And whilst they are a minority, there is still a lot of them. And just denying people the better product because most people will satisfy with a lesser product is just greedy and is one of those reasons that causes people to not buy their products, not the other way around.[/QUOTE]
there's no point keeping them stored if only a minority is going to download them (this minority would probably use up a not inconsiderable amount of bandwidth downloading the flac files too), especially when CDs are the same quality
flac's and wav's are huge, I like quality, but I don't like using up all the space on my 8gb ipod nano 3rd gen. I wish relatives would stop buying me itunes giftcards.
[QUOTE=Scotty.;34011116]
5. Mylo Xylo - Coldplay
[/QUOTE]
whoa what the fuck dude i bought that shit on vinyl and it's got some of the best tunes on it in ages
[QUOTE][b]The implication for the record industry is that they need to embrace this new model rather than fight it.[/b][/QUOTE]
So glad to see this in the article. Grow up and give people something they want. Look at what Valve has been doing in the past few years.
I really love the album format, I really hope it doesn't die out due to the rise of singles.
albums should be made as albums. a bunch of singles does not a good album make, and only good albums sell nowadays because you can buy just the one or two songs you actually like off of an album (where the modern model is "just stick a bunch of songs on the disc and sell it"), and that's cheaper. you used to not be able to do this and, not given the choice, you gave in and put up with the songs you weren't so fond of so you could enjoy the ones you did like
i like it when i listen to an album and it all just kind of fits together. i dont mind it when artists release a bunch of singles for a while. better that than release an album of a bunch of singles mashed up into a glorified mixtape
[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;34021912]There's no point keeping them stored if only a minority is going to download them (this minority would probably use up a not inconsiderable amount of bandwidth downloading the flac files too), especially when CDs are the same quality[/QUOTE]
How is there no point in offering the customer the service they deserve for having bought their product?
Bandcamp has no problem with artists making FLAC versions of their albums for sale. Why does major publishers with lots of money on their hands have that problem? Because they're offering the cheapest solution to maximize profit. There is no other reason.
Random bandcamp album:
[url]http://listen.takenobumusic.com/album/momotaro[/url]
9$ and you can decide the format yourself. FLAC available.
If you decide to buy the CD for 13$ you still get access to the digital download of the album.
[QUOTE=Derp Y. Mail;34014571]I know that anything over 350 kbit/s is useless.[/QUOTE]
Don't you guys know humans hear in 350 kbit/s, and see in 24fps?
over in the indie music world nobody cares because nobody buys albums from big companies and everyone just pirates the music because the artists tell them to do it.
vinyl master race bitches
Still prefer MP3 over any other format. There aren't many services offering FLAC as a download option and for me, that just means quality inconsistancy and availability problems for my music library. There are the occasions where you will not find a high quality MP3 of a song or album in this digital realm because it virtually doesn't exist anywhere else let alone a public CD release. Lossless users should listen to corporations who encourage purchasing a physical copy, giving you consumer rights to sell, return and have a backup source. Rather than complain that online distribution companies don't offer services that have only just become in existance, basically a 'goodwill' feature that has to attract a market because it is still so realitivly small and inpracticle for general public use at the moment. Although it may seem a small task to add FLAC options for downloads, you are basically pressuring them to overhaul their whole depository to fit your needs when they would rather to stick to the original formula as much as they can. I wouldn't like to be so reliant on CD's for a digital source, something that i am constantly trying to get rid of. I never did like the idea when back then it was a throw of the dice whether it got supported or not. I'm hoping more corperations do support other formats in the future but not in the expense of obsoleting others.
Also, if you have highend audio equipment it will make your FLAC file sound better. It will also make a MP3 file sound better. I'm not going to have an age old, controversal debate about the differentials between the two because it is boring.
Thoughts for why i didn't start collecting FLAC are:
2 copies of HDD to backup my library (Filesize = Bigger storage capacities)
Buy high end audio equipment to hear quality difference = Portability?
Online /Physical availability
Filesize
Compatible Hardware and Necessary Codecs
What I'd really love is for every album to be released on vinyl with a code for cd quality copies of the tracks, like the new release of Wish You Were Here. I've gotten into the habit of buying vinyl copies of shared music. Vinyls are great for collecting. Jewel cases not so much.
[editline]4th January 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;34015029]Amazon's "Cloud Drive" is actually pretty damn good at this. I can access my music anywhere I have internet access, even on my Android phone. Hell, I can even download it straight to the phone and listen to it even when I'm in a dead zone.[/QUOTE]
How big is your library? Have you looked at Google Music? I found the streaming to be much faster.
I don't understand the big argument about bitrate. Yes, I know a bigger number means better sound, but don't you have to have really high quality headphones/speakers to notice? I mean, if I'm putting music on my Zune and listening to it through my cheap-ass Skullcandies, I'm not going to be able to tell the difference between a 256Kbps AAC and a lossless file, right?
[QUOTE=TheLolrus;34039556]I don't understand the big argument about bitrate. Yes, I know a bigger number means better sound, but don't you have to have really high quality headphones/speakers to notice? I mean, if I'm putting music on my Zune and listening to it through my cheap-ass Skullcandies, I'm not going to be able to tell the difference between a 256Kbps AAC and a lossless file, right?[/QUOTE]
That is true, but that's only part of the argument here. For those of us who do have high quality speakers, we don't really get any option beyond buying our music on CD or vinyl. Digital distribution hasn't embraced FLAC or uncompressed WAV yet, so the knowledge that 256/320kbs MP3 is becoming the new standard is deeply troubling to those of us who want to listen to music in the highest quality possible.
Though I'm not saying this will actually happen, what will we do if music goes mostly, if not fully digital? If we can't get the uncompressed audio from CD's anymore and we're just left with MP3, then we'll simply be left in the dust and be told "Deal with it."
Basically, we just don't want it to become increasingly difficult to find high quality audio.
Also when you buy an entire album instead of just picking out the songs you already know you like, sure most of them won't be so great but you'll find the hidden gems. Theres always a few songs that aren't really well known that don't get any radio play or anything that you'll find really good.
[QUOTE=Daemon;34029827]Still prefer MP3 over any other format. There aren't many services offering FLAC as a download option and for me, that just means quality inconsistancy and availability problems for my music library. There are the occasions where you will not find a high quality MP3 of a song or album in this digital realm because it virtually doesn't exist anywhere else let alone a public CD release. Lossless users should listen to corporations who encourage purchasing a physical copy, giving you consumer rights to sell, return and have a backup source. Rather than complain that online distribution companies don't offer services that have only just become in existance, basically a 'goodwill' feature that has to attract a market because it is still so realitivly small and inpracticle for general public use at the moment. Although it may seem a small task to add FLAC options for downloads, you are basically pressuring them to overhaul their whole depository to fit your needs when they would rather to stick to the original formula as much as they can. I wouldn't like to be so reliant on CD's for a digital source, something that i am constantly trying to get rid of. I never did like the idea when back then it was a throw of the dice whether it got supported or not. I'm hoping more corperations do support other formats in the future but not in the expense of obsoleting others.
Also, if you have highend audio equipment it will make your FLAC file sound better. It will also make a MP3 file sound better. I'm not going to have an age old, controversal debate about the differentials between the two because it is boring.
Thoughts for why i didn't start collecting FLAC are:
2 copies of HDD to backup my library (Filesize = Bigger storage capacities)
Buy high end audio equipment to hear quality difference = Portability?
[B]Online /Physical availability [/B]
[B]Filesize[/B]
[B]Compatible Hardware and Necessary Codecs[/B][/QUOTE]
CDs are lossless, you can just rip those to FLAC.
And you shouldn't need to install codecs for FLAC, just get a decent media player.
I hope you also realize how much FLAC music you can fit on a 1TB drive. You must have a shitload of music.
I use FLAC when I can because, why not? I have the room to spare on my HDD, and it's smaller than uncompressed lossless audio.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.