Guest oa Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Sorry , but for many reasons we already know - 92k is not an accepable bitrate to listen to psytrance- From my own exeriences - im not a minimal fan - i heard atmos and son kite at 128k mp3s and didnt think much - then heard them on CD quality and though it was wonderful. Now i 'get; thier music. i can get a sample of the music at 92k but no fuking way you can hear the effort put into the music by the artist at 92k - The artists (hello israel) are getting much crisper and cleaner with thier music , and cutting it down to 92k takes away - where some might like cooler fx n tricks, other might like a cleaner , more trance enducing sound. let me not go on forever about this - u get my point - if bandwidth is a problem - there are many free place where people can upload music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 correction - 96k just noticed another post on this, but feel free to express your feeling about my comment here as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Protex Midget Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 I agree. I that we should compramise and settle for 128K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike's BOSS Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Well you can still decide if you like the music or not at a 96 kbit rate...can't you? And if you like the music then you will buy the CD (I hope)...then you don't need the mp3...so what are you complaining about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naiman Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Yes, but it's harder to notice the sound quality of the track at only 96 kbit rate. it should be 128kb atleast! 96kbit is too muddy.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SpuTeR Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 Yes.. I think too it sux.. At least 112k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest asdf Posted February 1, 2002 Share Posted February 1, 2002 i think 96 kbps is fine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest acev Posted February 2, 2002 Share Posted February 2, 2002 Last time I downloaded all the tracks, always knowing I could use them afterwards to make myself my own best of. There is no chance I will download 100 or more tracks which I can dump afterwards because of the quality.....I do not think that's a wise decision, the contest will loose much of its ??? whatever, just my opinion PLUR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vasyachkin Posted February 2, 2002 Share Posted February 2, 2002 with almost everything available on Audiogalaxy mostly at either 128 , 160 or 192 i do not bother downloading anything below 128. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mars Posted February 4, 2002 Share Posted February 4, 2002 if this discussion is about the kbps asked for the 2nd contest, here's my answer: this is not a problem of space or quality, thisis a problem of rights... you know, when something has chances to be released you can't offer free download at acceptable quality, you just give enough for people to have an opinion... well i'd like to see you in Children's shoes. he's really got a lot to cope with, he has to satisfy everyone and he does that for free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa Posted February 4, 2002 Share Posted February 4, 2002 IC 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.