NEMO.BOFH Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Well, 1. , 2. & 4. are absolutely right. I also see you posted "No Comment" @ points 1 & 2 made by reno... Anyways... BLAH No comment because I AGREE with those Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time_Trap Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 No comment because I AGREE with those which means they are true.. that was my point.. you only disagreed at a certain part of the post and then radi came and told me it's just my silly truth and i am a fool etc etc he had a bad day i guess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEMO.BOFH Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 which means they are true.. that was my point.. you only disagreed at a certain part of the post and then radi came and told me it's just my silly truth and i am a fool etc etc he had a bad day i guess you dont get it do you? 1. rino tells radi, that he is stupid 2. you agree with that statement since you say that he tells the truth. 3. radi feels offended. 4. you feel attacked by radi. 5. radi feels attacked by you. pretty logic imo And all of rinos statements are not absolute truths, so he has no right to tell radi that he is stupid. IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radi6404 Posted February 14, 2007 Author Share Posted February 14, 2007 you dont get it do you? 1. rino tells radi, that he is stupid 2. you agree with that statement since you say that he tells the truth. 3. radi feels offended. 4. you feel attacked by radi. 5. radi feels attacked by you. pretty logic imo And all of rinos statements are not absolute truths, so he has no right to tell radi that he is stupid. IMO. The fool thing was also meant to rino aswell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpi Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Jesus, it's getting ridiculous now. Why don't you all go play in the sandpit already? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEMO.BOFH Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Jesus, it's getting ridiculous now. Why don't you all go play in the sandpit already? since you felt so compelled to participate, why dont you bring the spades and the forms? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rino Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 So after so many warnings pointed at me to stay on topic, I'm the only one who hasn't gone off yet. Cool. Up until now. Now I will. I have to. In no way did I say radi is stupid. Why? Because I do not know him. What he wrote though (his statements and thoughts) are dull. In another words. yes, I said they were stupid. And I am willing to repeat it another 20 times. Why? Because the statement that the tracks for the Tantrance compilation series were additonaly remastered is wrong... Period. The tracks were merely collected, and put on CD. Naturally, only after the home labels of the artists in question gave the permission to use those tracks on other V.A.s. Each and every track from any of the Tantrance compilations was previously released on other places... The Tantrance series, however, remains a nice compilation, which very often successfuly collected the best of goa trance from a certain period, and gave the listeners a nice overlook of where the genre stands in the given moment. And as for the Doof track fro Tantrance, it is an alternate version of the track from "Let's turn on", in the same fashion that there were two versions of the track Atomic Armadillo by the Green Nuns Of The Revolution... Or, the same thing that took place with Crop Circles' Lunar Civilization, which had only one version released, and other 6 or 7 stayed alternate mixes, seen only on bootleg compilations and DJ mixes... So, when radi says he likes that version better, he is actually not saying ANYTHING about the Tantrance series, but more expressing his opinion on a single track. Furthermore, that implies that this whole thread is pointless, because all he said in the first place is that he like some tracks which just happened to find themselves on Tantrance. And why does he think they have better sound than elsewhere, that's his and only his secret. Maybe he should ask his speakers before going out public on a forum... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEMO.BOFH Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 So after so many warnings pointed at me to stay on topic, I'm the only one who hasn't gone off yet. Cool. Up until now. Now I will. I have to. In no way did I say radi is stupid. Why? Because I do not know him. What he wrote though (his statements and thoughts) are dull. In another words. yes, I said they were stupid. And I am willing to repeat it another 20 times. Why? Because the statement that the tracks for the Tantrance compilation series were additonaly remastered is wrong... Period. The tracks were merely collected, and put on CD. Naturally, only after the home labels of the artists in question gave the permission to use those tracks on other V.A.s. Each and every track from any of the Tantrance compilations was previously released on other places... The Tantrance series, however, remains a nice compilation, which very often successfuly collected the best of goa trance from a certain period, and gave the listeners a nice overlook of where the genre stands in the given moment. And as for the Doof track fro Tantrance, it is an alternate version of the track from "Let's turn on", in the same fashion that there were two versions of the track Atomic Armadillo by the Green Nuns Of The Revolution... Or, the same thing that took place with Crop Circles' Lunar Civilization, which had only one version released, and other 6 or 7 stayed alternate mixes, seen only on bootleg compilations and DJ mixes... So, when radi says he likes that version better, he is actually not saying ANYTHING about the Tantrance series, but more expressing his opinion on a single track. Furthermore, that implies that this whole thread is pointless, because all he said in the first place is that he like some tracks which just happened to find themselves on Tantrance. And why does he think they have better sound than elsewhere, that's his and only his secret. Maybe he should ask his speakers before going out public on a forum... And you are 100% sure of this because? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rino Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 And you are 100% sure of this because? Because I actually read it in an extensive music article a couple of years ago- the article was about all the sampling, copyright and plagerazing stuff. Now, when you are an artist, and a signed one too (meaning you are bound to a record deal), the material you produce under a certain name belongs to the label, which has the exclusive right of publishing those tracks. So, for example, when I come to you (and let's pretend that you're a record label executive) and I want to use a track from one of your artists, for a compilation my label has in preparation, you give me the licenced right to use that track on a certain various artists compilation. Nothing more. It's not like I'm buying the track in a sense that I can do whatever the hell I want with it... When you remaster a track, when you have the right to do that, it means you own the track, and all the rights to it, and in the case of the Tantrance compilations, that is not true. How do I know? Well, it says inside the liner notes (the stuff about copyright, and the reserved rights of the only Tantrance V.A. I actually own!). Now, you can argue me, and say that the "Retrodelic vibes" compilations have older tracks with the remastered sound, and I would say: "OK, nemo, you win!" without trouble, but my biggest argument for the Tantrance compilations is common sense, good headphones and a pair of very healthy ears ! And, as well as I pointed out before, there is no word about remastering on my copy of Tantrance 4, which I bought, by the way, back in the day to have Plastic and Elektron Bender on original CDs!!! On the other hand, as radi correctly pointed out, on compilations like Tantrance what does happen from time to time, is that you have alternate versions of already released and known tracks, which are unfortunately (NOT always) very often left overs, that have never made it to the final cut, from better and more complete versions that have already previously seen the light of day on proper albums or 12''. If you don't believe me- take any two V.A.s you have from and make sure one is Tantrance, and that the other one is any compilation that contains a track previously heard on the Tantrance one... And let me know! See, sometimes it's just enough to sit down and listen properly... And, just let me ask you, for example, my Tantrance compilation is from 1997, the same year that Etnica's Plastic came out. So, why would anybody remaster in the year 1997 a track that was produced that very same year. And just look at the tracklists on those Tantrances- in 97% of the cases, those are tracks released in the same year as the compilation came out... My hands are falling off from writting, we can continue after a short commercial break... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEMO.BOFH Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Because I actually read it in an extensive music article a couple of years ago- the article was about all the sampling, copyright and plagerazing stuff. Now, when you are an artist, and a signed one too (meaning you are bound to a record deal), the material you produce under a certain name belongs to the label, which has the exclusive right of publishing those tracks. So, for example, when I come to you (and let's pretend that you're a record label executive) and I want to use a track from one of your artists, for a compilation my label has in preparation, you give me the licenced right to use that track on a certain various artists compilation. Nothing more. It's not like I'm buying the track in a sense that I can do whatever the hell I want with it... When you remaster a track, when you have the right to do that, it means you own the track, and all the rights to it, and in the case of the Tantrance compilations, that is not true. How do I know? Well, it says inside the liner notes (the stuff about copyright, and the reserved rights of the only Tantrance V.A. I actually own!). Now, you can argue me, and say that the "Retrodelic vibes" compilations have older tracks with the remastered sound, and I would say: "OK, nemo, you win!" without trouble, but my biggest argument for the Tantrance compilations is common sense, good headphones and a pair of very healthy ears ! And, as well as I pointed out before, there is no word about remastering on my copy of Tantrance 4, which I bought, by the way, back in the day to have Plastic and Elektron Bender on original CDs!!! On the other hand, as radi correctly pointed out, on compilations like Tantrance what does happen from time to time, is that you have alternate versions of already released and known tracks, which are unfortunately (NOT always) very often left overs, that have never made it to the final cut, from better and more complete versions that have already previously seen the light of day on proper albums or 12''. If you don't believe me- take any two V.A.s you have from and make sure one is Tantrance, and that the other one is any compilation that contains a track previously heard on the Tantrance one... And let me know! See, sometimes it's just enough to sit down and listen properly... And, just let me ask you, for example, my Tantrance compilation is from 1997, the same year that Etnica's Plastic came out. So, why would anybody remaster in the year 1997 a track that was produced that very same year. And just look at the tracklists on those Tantrances- in 97% of the cases, those are tracks released in the same year as the compilation came out... My hands are falling off from writting, we can continue after a short commercial break... So, you are saying, because it doesnt say so on your cover, that its impossible that it was remastered for this production? Ok then, I will leave it at that.. Again you are wrong as well, just because I dont own the track, or licenced the track, doesnt mean I can not remaster it (Ive had a label, and I know MANY label owners, and not just SMALL ones!). It all depends on HOW you licence the track, what it says in the contract of the licence etc etc... Many labels have re-released tracks by licencing them from another label, and remastered them for the use of this compilation, the owner stays the same though, the original label. So please thats not an argument, its an attempt to make sense, and make a fact out of a non-fact. So, do you have 100% inside information on that these tracks were not: 1. Pressed in a higher quality plant. 2. Remastered for the use of the compilation. ? Regards, Nemo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sideffect... Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 why so negative ? don't get it, good question about music, different oppinions, there's no need in being offensive bringing your own opinin, respect the other opinion has not the meaning not your's being disrespected, well on topic: about tantrance compilations I do not agree with the threadstarter, we had in the old skool period a certain compilation movement like the distance to goa, goa head, tantrance who started from the beginning and envolved with the goa artist, but collecting them all is unneccesary cause you would but indeed now lot's of compilations, like all compilations have tracks from artist who are NOT on albums or never appear on albums from the artist, for example sirius isness - micro tunes appeared on 3 comp's I know but has never been released on the two albums of sirius issness as well, just like cosmic tone - cosmic story and on & on many many examples, but indeed those tracks are pretty good and in my example those two tracks the sirius and cosmic are the the best one they ever made, cosmic tone already existed , released an album, others release their frist track on a comp... the mystery of the 13 crystal skulls same thing, and again I have the feeling those artist gave their best shot, the best alien project track is still the first track on 13 crystal .... I think many will agree with that, well my 2 cents, I respect others opinion, hope you will mine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest The Journey Man Project Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I find this topic even funnier seeing that I've had a mint copy of Tantrance Vol.7 up for trade... and cheap trade at that... seing as I have two copies, yet even afte 68 views of that topic nobody wants to trade for anything! well... it looks like you guys miss out and it goes to my local trade for $5US... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeathPosture Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Maybe your silly truth, but not the truth you fool. I said that i think the Tantrance compilations are of better quality because for example the Tantrance Let´s turn on version is better than the original version, for example there are also other compilations liek a taste of dragonfly which seem to have better versions of the tracks like the orignal ones, the doubledragons version of this compilation sounds better and more rich of sounds than the orignal version IMO. You're comparing mp3s aren't you Radi? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEMO.BOFH Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 I find this topic even funnier seeing that I've had a mint copy of Tantrance Vol.7 up for trade... and cheap trade at that... seing as I have two copies, yet even afte 68 views of that topic nobody wants to trade for anything! well... it looks like you guys miss out and it goes to my local trade for $5US...If I didnt already have them I would pay dear money for them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radi6404 Posted February 15, 2007 Author Share Posted February 15, 2007 rino, please shut up you imbecile, man, am i not allowed to ask questions anymore or what, who are you to tell me taht i am not allowed to ask questions, i didn´t say i am 100 percent sure that tantrance have better quality sound but i said that i think so and you just know to offend, sorry if that´s your way i can do it also as you see, please don´t post in my threads if you can explain what you want say with personal offendings you fool, okay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEMO.BOFH Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 rino, please shut up you imbecile, man, am i not allowed to ask questions anymore or what, who are you to tell me taht i am not allowed to ask questions, i didn´t say i am 100 percent sure that tantrance have better quality sound but i said that i think so and you just know to offend, sorry if that´s your way i can do it also as you see, please don´t post in my threads if you can explain what you want say with personal offendings you fool, okay?hey hey now, i think it perfectly explained in his last post that he didnt call you an idiot nor stupid. So please, lets keep the debate about whether they actually DO sound better or not. Calling someone imbecile, has gotten you into trouble before! Anyways, As I dont have the cd right here, I can not do an analysis of the sound compared to another source. Can you check against other sources Rino?! It would be funny to see what the outcome is! Nemo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisk Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 You're comparing mp3s aren't you Radi? Oh yeah, good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rino Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Anyways, As I dont have the cd right here, I can not do an analysis of the sound compared to another source. Can you check against other sources Rino?! It would be funny to see what the outcome is! Yeah! In fact, you really got me intrigued now, and I'll test and hear for myself! Yeah, I have no inside information, but I always thought that if you want to change or modify a track, in order to make that process legal, you have to present all the necessary information in the CD booklet, no? For the copyright and stuff... As for the "making sense and factd out of non-facts", it wasn't that I'll try and deny a 100% sure fact, but I mean, can't you actually hear remastered and digitally improved music? I know I can... But, I'll do some V.A. comparing, you do some, and then we can (maybe) draw a sensible conclusion! radi... no comment: in your own thread, when you ran out of arguments, you went for the lowest common denominator and started insulting people (me, to be specific)... I don't even have to know and see you, in order to understand that you truly are a child. Incapable of having normal and civilized discussions. And I read a post of yours once complaining how nobody ever replies in your topics. You want to know why? Because nobody likes to deal with incompetent kids. People stand behind their statements. You don't. In fact, you cannot even reason and explain why you wrote that. You instantly try and gain some credibility and bonus points by insulting me? And that is the best you can do? Now I see it was a good idea that you changed your nick... Nothing more to add. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEMO.BOFH Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Yeah! In fact, you really got me intrigued now, and I'll test and hear for myself! Yeah, I have no inside information, but I always thought that if you want to change or modify a track, in order to make that process legal, you have to present all the necessary information in the CD booklet, no? For the copyright and stuff... As for the "making sense and factd out of non-facts", it wasn't that I'll try and deny a 100% sure fact, but I mean, can't you actually hear remastered and digitally improved music? I know I can... But, I'll do some V.A. comparing, you do some, and then we can (maybe) draw a sensible conclusion! radi... no comment: in your own thread, when you ran out of arguments, you went for the lowest common denominator and started insulting people (me, to be specific)... I don't even have to know and see you, in order to understand that you truly are a child. Incapable of having normal and civilized discussions. And I read a post of yours once complaining how nobody ever replies in your topics. You want to know why? Because nobody likes to deal with incompetent kids. People stand behind their statements. You don't. In fact, you cannot even reason and explain why you wrote that. You instantly try and gain some credibility and bonus points by insulting me? And that is the best you can do? Now I see it was a good idea that you changed your nick... Nothing more to add. Well, if you take a look at many cds from that era, you will not find many cds where it actually mentions who mastered the tracks. I just had a look at some old house cds/vinyls hehehe I also had a look at some old TIP stuff, and no mention of Mastering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rino Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Well, if you take a look at many cds from that era, you will not find many cds where it actually mentions who mastered the tracks. I just had a look at some old house cds/vinyls hehehe I also had a look at some old TIP stuff, and no mention of Mastering. Yeah, I second that, remember how also a lot of artists (OK, not a lot, but some) had trouble releasing tracks for not paying copyright and asking for sample permissions and stuff? No, I see what you mean about the T.I.P. releases (eventhough I don't have too many of their originals) and the mastering, but I was never arguing that- what I always argued is that tracks actually got re-mastered for the purpose of V.A.'s like Distance To Goa, Tantrance, Goa Head or Destination Goa... Mastering itself is a whole new thing, and it is not always mentioned who was in charge of it. For example, with Etnica's and Pleiadians releases... I mean when you put a '97 track already released on an album, and put it on a '97 CD compilation, I don't see much need (or way) to improve sound quality. OK, it's another thing when you want to use a vinyl only track for a compilation- I reckon you won't place it on CD with all the hissing noises... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supergroover Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 well.. if you collect 10 tracks from different albums with different people mastering them it might actually make sense. You have 10 tracks at possibly different levels.. for the new compi it might not be a bad idea to get them on the same level again. thus mastering them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.