Hi, im new here and i was thinking about some things. First is: Isnt it right that u wanna safe bandwith? So why u dont use bittorrent instead of http downloads? This would have another great advantage. chemicalbeavis rips the show in high quality waveformat and converts it to 192kbps mp3. Everybody knows, mp3 isnt lossless. But there is a compressionmethod available called flac. [url]http://flac.sourceforge.net/[/url] It allows lossless compression and uses only 50 percent of discspace. Example: a 500 mb wavefile could be compressed !lossless! to 250mb flacfile. there is also a plugin for winamp and xmms (linux) available.

So why dont safe bandwith by publishing the Kiss100 shows via bittorrent. And rip them in a higher quality.???

Krauthead :)

Sorry for my noobish english

because this board is based in America!

we like to waste things like gas and bandwidth, all the while putting forth a less than top quality product, but you'll eat it anyway.

i am not gonna sit around all day to download 250 meg files. mp3 is almost perfect, why mess with that?

"If it works do not fix it" ... plus mp3 is standard for a lot of media players ... you can also rip it to a cd and listen in your car, cd player, etc.

it just does not make sense to mess around.

Re: to the [ms] Team

cant believe what u sayin. Why the downloadbanning shit? Safe bandwith can be the only possible reason for that, or? this is a serious topic. So plz dont give me stupid answers. Thx :?

[quote=Jenks";p="57222]because this board is based in America!

we like to waste things like gas and bandwidth, all the while putting forth a less than top quality product, but you'll eat it anyway.[/quote] Couldn't have said it better myself!

There's a lot of people on dialup here, too. Would you want a perfect file that's 5 times the download time, or a indistinguishly-imperfect file that still sounds the same when you listen to it that's the regular download time?

Re: to the [ms] Team

wave is more standard than mp3 is. Every CDplayer can play wavefiles! Every CD that u can by in a store contains wavefiles. And there is a big diffrence between mp3 and wave quality!

fact is, we like it this way. and that's the only reason that matters.

^^^ what the boss said.

have fun converting your files to wavdiscmp3largefilesoundforge.

Re: to the [ms] Team

[quote=Krauthead]Every CDplayer can play wavefiles! [/quote]:CrackUp:

[quote=Krauthead]Every CD that u can by in a store contains wavefiles.[/quote]:ROFLMAO:

[quote=Krauthead]And there is a big diffrence between mp3 and wave quality![/quote]:lol:

I like you.

[quote=asdf_admin";p="57227] "If it works do not fix it" ... plus mp3 is standard for a lot of media players ... you can also rip it to a cd and listen in your car, cd player, etc.

it just does not make sense to mess around.[/quote]

I agree. Everything works fine now. No need for any change here.

Krauthead, I know you mean well.... we started with mp3 about 2 years ago...... going through all the trouble to convert / upload / bit torrent the site means more and more issues. People are already going crazy on the boards with the download / minimum post restrictions and renaming files to mp3....

can you imaging how nuts the board would be stupid questions if everyone on here started asking about goot bittorrent clients and how to download them, which player to get etc. etc. etc.

fact is..... MP3 is still smaller than aflac and we dont want to push higher bit rates of audio out simply because people start ripping up singles from the sets and start using them for personal purposes..........

also if the quality is half ass bad, then the likelihood is less.....

while I know it becomes hard for people to rip with the voiceovers and everything.... believe me I've heard singles from kiss mixes running amok on slsk....

hope that answers your Q

-e-

Reminds me of when my mother slapped me on the back of the head and said, "If you want em mashed, mash em your goddamn self!" Ever since then I take what I'm given with a smile on my face and you'll never hear a f-ing peep outta me!

^^^ lol.

why going to a compression without loss when we are ripping a radio show? it's radio dude... can't even compare cd quality with that, so why worrying about the compression? 192kbps mp3 works perfect for me :)

^^^ surely does.

Isn't the broadcast only 128k layer 2 anyway?

i just love the ms, so much info w/ a helping of sarcasim.

yeah. you get a steaming meal only to bite into a cold piece of steak. mmm. =P

Re: to the [ms] Team

You must have sensitive ears to hear the difference, I'm still getting the getting the groove & feel of the sets, that's good enough for me!

[quote=arielus";p="57442]why going to a compression without loss when we are ripping a radio show? it's radio dude... can't even compare cd quality with that, so why worrying about the compression?[/quote]

Bingo! Radio is already a loss as is due to the FM signal compression, even if recorded on a digital tuner like most people do...so to slightly compress it a bit more is not going to destroy the sound...192 is pretty close as is based on file size as well.

[quote=";p="57507] [quote=arielus";p="57442]why going to a compression without loss when we are ripping a radio show? it's radio dude... can't even compare cd quality with that, so why worrying about the compression?[/quote]

Bingo! Radio is already a loss as is due to the FM signal compression, even if recorded on a digital tuner like most people do...so to slightly compress it a bit more is not going to destroy the sound...192 is pretty close as is based on file size as well. [/quote]

Even the oldest Indians know there is no such a thing like FM compression...it is called modulation or whatever in english and it doesnt make any difference in signal quality.

Back to the thing...no sens in having 250mb files...true, think about ale the dial up guys who are still trying overnight downloads.

Re: to the [ms] Team

:lol: jesus you just can't please some people. i dont' want fucking 250mb mixes taking up space on my harddrive and taking too long to download. its a fucking radio mix for gods sake, deal with mp3. unless you're listening to it through decent monitors or something then the extra quality is a complete waste anyway.

people that bitch about the quality of 192kbps mp3s need to get a life IMO

Re: to the [ms] Team

[quote=xeb";p="57751]:lol: jesus you just can't please some people. i dont' want fucking 250mb mixes taking up space on my harddrive and taking too long to download. its a fucking radio mix for gods sake, deal with mp3. unless you're listening to it through decent monitors or something then the extra quality is a complete waste anyway.

people that bitch about the quality of 192kbps mp3s need to get a life IMO[/quote] I couldn't agree more. It's time for the bitchin' to end. Take off the diapers ya whinny ingrates. :AssKicki: :Gotcha:

[quote=demonAfro";p="57456]Isn't the broadcast only 128k layer 2 anyway?[/quote]

It's not recorded from the web broadcast...

And my cd player DOES play mp3 and DOES NOT play wav. Of course it does not play flac either. Sure, I could get myself a converter but I bought myself a cd/mp3 player just for the reason that I don't have to convert anything (with a standard mp3 player I would have to rip my cds to mp3...)

Re: to the [ms] Team

I gotta agree with the .."Don't fix what ain't broke" Idea. :RockOn: I've been listening to them this way on megga watt system and sounds pretty good to me. THe bass and the highs are all there. A little hiss is not gonna make me less inclined to listen. Progress not perfection is alot happier way of life for me. I'm greatfull to have what we got. And on a high speed server, not some P2P network that is alot slower. Love MS and it's crew for the sets and everything else. :D :Bingo:

i concur. roger, over. over, roger. :RockOn:

FLAC is pointless, as said the audio source isn't a CD to begin with.

I can hear upto 256kb/s, and I really couldn't be fucked, downloading a RADIO SHOW (regardless of show) @ 2x the current file size for something that sounds the slightest bit better.

I'd rather save MY and MS's bandwidth.

I like the mp3 format vs the Torrent format.(as long as MS can keep up the bandwidth) It allows me to download the sets @ work as it's HTTP traffic.

Thanks for sharing, really.

And if you're going FLAC, I'd prefer OGG ;)

--djway

I definetely agree with the "It ain't broken, why try an overhaul." mentality.

But adding my 2 cents.

3-4 years ago I bought the very first MP3 capable Car Stereo Deck that supports MP3's written to CD. It cost me like $500+ but it was well worth it. I enjoy listening to sets in my car more then anywhere else.

Compression is certainly not perfect, but like everyone has said, its a radio show. And for me, I can't fit 10+ hours of music onto one CD like I do now with FLAC files. And actually can fit closer to 12+ hours if I overburn. I can't take FLAC files and immediately put them onto my iPod and away I go. I would have to sit around converting everything I download as an incredibly large FLAC file, and then convert it to VBR MP3 and then just delete the FLAC because I have no need for it.

MP3 is my life. My iPod and my Kenwood are my life. I only need to have like 2 or 3 CDs in my car and they'll last me over a week.

this thread is hilarious.

MP3 RULZ BIATCH ! ! !

The show on DAB is only broadcast at 128k... recompressing above 192k is pointless, duh!

thx @ encryption for the best answer.

lmao.

what a fucking critic.

@asdf_admin: u should get a price, i mean a chewing gum or something, for wasting the most space in this forum. U like the Spacebar ...... eh?

^you should get something too, like asdf's used gum, for posts like this. :roll:

Re: to the [ms] Team

^ Yellow card Jenksl, Yellow Card!

lol.

it's called negative white space ... learn something about art and you will understand.

=P

Re: to the [ms] Team

:Tongue:

i am not a serious person. =)

only when making love ... and cyber.

@ asdf_admin: i love u! btw. u testet Sauerkraut already? :)