lost highway Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 isn't the obvious answer that tapers spend more time and money? More time and money than the actual band, the label that puts it out and the actual studio that has refined the art of recording it? Tapers are intelligent, tech savy and we have already agreed valuable. But lets not forget that they are also hobbysists, and furthermore fans like the rest of us. But oh wait, is that smiley face for sarcasm? If so I agree with you, if not see above. Sorry. Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 there's no possible way you missed the sarcasm in that. someone take away the guy's internet license. Link to post Share on other sites
wheelco Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Hey ....What's up, y'all?is it you, Big Ray!!??!! Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 this is how you always back your way out of your douchebag comments. "I was just kidding. TeeHee, I'm sacrastic" it seemed like there were a few months when you were nowhere to be seen. I liked you better then. I think that Jeff Tweedy guy once wrote a song called "Pot Kettle Black", and the title was a play on the old saying "That's like the pot calling the kettle black". Yeah. I think. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 there's no possible way you missed the sarcasm in that. someone take away the guy's internet license. You'll have to excuse some of us who are less accustomed to communicating in smilies. Although your ninja has enriched your statement quite cutely. Link to post Share on other sites
MKHstudios Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Glad this thread is still alive... ugh. As a cave dwelling troll / 'Star Trek' convention goer who records concerts due to the fact that I have no life. Did I get that right Uncle Wilco? I could care less what format you choose to listen to the music. Play it through two cans and a string for all I care. I believe the torrent sites ask it not to be shared as MP3's to keep the integrity of quality as it is passed on to others. Once you have it - if you prefer to MP3 it at 128K and then load it onto your 'chinese turd' - I mean Ipod - then go for it. In most cases these days people can not tell the difference between the two because the only place they hear music is through the very mediocre earbuds that come with your 'chinese turd' - sorry, Ipod. Okay, got to run - I have a comic book convention to attend this afternoon and a 'Lord of the Rings' dress up party later this evening. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Here's a man with a sense of humor. If you read up on it (here's where my cave dork comes out to party with yours) a high bit rate mp3 is vitually indistinguishable from a wav or other format, to your average sound engineer with the acception of some very moderate phase distortion on the higher frequencies (much more obvious on low quality mp3's). There is no doubt that transmitting, changing, and trading mp3's no matter how high the quality can degrade it into a rather pathetic state. ALL digital audio sources are said to produce higher listener fatigue, but they still haven't invented a record player then can be installed in an automobile. So chinese turd or cd player you still only get odd frequencies. Let us not forget that Jeff Tweedy himself polluted your ears with 128 bit mp3's for download with Sunken Treasure. Now back to your lair dragon slayer. Link to post Share on other sites
HighFives Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 solution = ipods and itunes need to support flac, shn, ogg, etc. Then there would be no reason to even want the mp3s except that they are smaller file sizes... Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Good point. Here's a man with a sense of humor. If you read up on it (here's where my cave dork comes out to party with yours) a high bit rate mp3 is vitually indistinguishable from a wav or other format, to your average sound engineer with the acception of some very moderate phase distortion on the higher frequencies (much more obvious on low quality mp3's). There is no doubt that transmitting, changing, and trading mp3's no matter how high the quality can degrade it into a rather pathetic state. ALL digital audio sources are said to produce higher listener fatigue, but they still haven't invented a record player then can be installed in an automobile. So chinese turd or cd player you still only get odd frequencies. Let us not forget that Jeff Tweedy himself polluted your ears with 128 bit mp3's for download with Sunken Treasure. Now back to your lair dragon slayer. unless we go back to 1956 that is Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 solution = ipods and itunes need to support flac, shn, ogg, etc. Then there would be no reason to even want the mp3s except that they are smaller file sizes... Why would you put FLAC on your iPod though? You'd have like 30 albums on it, then. That would be lame. Link to post Share on other sites
IrishMickyWard Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 I actually have a Cowan IAudio X5L that plays all formats (including MP3's and FLAC's). The player is the best I have owned - battery is great and I can pick and choose my formats. When I get suckered into buying a song for $1 on Itunes - well then I load the 128k MP3. When I download a FLAC from one of the torrent sites, I load it and give a few listens before removing it, buring it to DVD, and filing it in the collection. Can you tell a difference between the two - not through headphones (unless you use a pair of Sennheiser HD-25's), not through the system in either of my cars, but in my home where I have a nice set up that I can really 'crank' with a sub (ensuring I am getting most freqs) - you can most certainly tell the difference. The best portable setup I have heard is the Cowan IAudio X5L with a pair of Sennheiser CX-300 earbuds. Link to post Share on other sites
quarter23cd Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Then there would be no reason to even want the mp3s except that they are smaller file sizes...I think that is already the case.(that people just want smaller files) Most people who convert stuff (me, at least, and I'm just projecting upon everyone else ) do so primarily because digital storage space comes at a premium, so if I can convert something into a reasonably-high bitrate MP3 to save some space, I will.(I can tell some difference, but not enough to bother me terribly) Someday when a device the size of an iPod can hold terabytes of data, I probably won't bother with converting....but for now I only have 7GB left of my 60GB iPod and I'm really anal about not using it up too fast! Link to post Share on other sites
MKHstudios Posted February 19, 2007 Share Posted February 19, 2007 Let us not forget that Jeff Tweedy himself polluted your ears with 128 bit mp3's for download with Sunken Treasure. And I am so glad they did. Those tracks are great and their sharing of the music with this community is unmatched. I am not against MP3's. But I guess I would have prefered FLAC's and if I wanted to convert them into MP3's - I would do it on my own. You can always convert a lossless FLAC into an MP3, but you can never turn a MP3 into the original lossless FLAC and I prefer to have both. Link to post Share on other sites
HighFives Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Why would you put FLAC on your iPod though? You'd have like 30 albums on it, then. That would be lame. I just heard the argument that the only reason people want mp3s is to put em on the ipod. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Steve Jobs does not care about FLAC people. Plus we live in a take your music with you everywhere you go these days - of course when I was a teenager, it was boomboxes - playing cassettes - the Mp3 of the day. Besides occasion online radio listening at work, I only listen to music at home - so I only fool with Mp3 files when it is the only way I can get something I want to hear. Link to post Share on other sites
MKHstudios Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Plus we live in a take your music with you everywhere you go these days - of course when I was a teenager, it was boomboxes - playing cassettes - the Mp3 of the day. that started long ago... Back at my elementary school your coolness was measured by which vinyl albums you were sporting under your arm in the bus lines after school. I was 'the man' the day I brought in Love Gun by Kiss. I guess you are still pretty cool today if you can bust out the Summerteeth vinyl. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I just heard the argument that the only reason people want mp3s is to put em on the ipod. Yeah, pretty much the only reason I convert to MP3 is to put it on my iPod. I honestly can't tell the difference. Link to post Share on other sites
j4lackey Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 .....here's where my cave dork comes out to party with yours.... Steve Jobs does not care about FLAC people. Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I have a very fond memory of walking, no, strutting, down the hall at my high school blasting Uriah Heep's "Easy Livin'" out of a Sony boombox. That was a good box - the radio part still works to this day. Link to post Share on other sites
jhh4321 Posted February 20, 2007 Author Share Posted February 20, 2007 So...any of you guys want anymore lossy shows? Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I'd like thread with every Wilco show in as lossy a format as possible. Can you please record them on a tape deck and then rerecord them through the crappy microphone on your laptop? And then convert them to MP3? Thanks. Link to post Share on other sites
froggie Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I have a very fond memory of walking, no, strutting, down the hall at my high school blasting Uriah Heep's "Easy Livin'" out of a Sony boombox. That was a good box - the radio part still works to this day. how many times you get beat up that way? Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 I have a very fond memory of walking, no, strutting, down the hall at my high school blasting Uriah Heep's "Easy Livin'" out of a Sony boombox. That was a good box - the radio part still works to this day. Would you say that album was a 8.3 or 5.6 1/2? Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 that started long ago... Back at my elementary school your coolness was measured by which vinyl albums you were sporting under your arm in the bus lines after school. I was 'the man' the day I brought in Love Gun by Kiss. I guess you are still pretty cool today if you can bust out the Summerteeth vinyl. I recall taking KISS albums into home room and playing them on one of those board of education black box record players - in 1977 I think. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 20, 2007 Share Posted February 20, 2007 Yeah, pretty much the only reason I convert to MP3 is to put it on my iPod. I honestly can't tell the difference. You should do a test - while you can still hear. Take a song you know well - say some Beatles song. Listen to the vinly. Listen to the CD. Listen to a FLAC file of the song. Listen to an Mp3 of the song. What is preferred bit rate of Mp3's in an ipod? Less than 128? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts