[deleted]
[deleted]
My reservation about D/L'ing from this site is that the files are all lossless, which also means they are large. I have to D/L a large file only to find out that while others may think it is great, I do not. Do you think it would be possible to have short clips in MP3 format? Then I and others could sample these files before spending an hour or so D/L'ing the file?
Just a suggestion.
My reservation about D/L'ing from this site is that the files are all lossless, which also means they are large. I have to D/L a large file only to find out that while others may think it is great, I do not. Do you think it would be possible to have short clips in MP3 format? Then I and others could sample these files before spending an hour or so D/L'ing the file?
Just a suggestion.
I just quickly browsed some stuff and the few downloads I did were in MP3.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Something simple like OggPreview would help out the user AND the artist 1000% compared to now.
It would not be a problem with their policy, since no-one would transcode or store a 30 second sample of a song.
And as said earlier (and thought by thousands like me/us). Most people are not interested in testing out new artist when they have to spend hours/maybe even days of downloading just to get a cd from a unknown artist (where the odds are that they won't like it)
IMO its incredible that they have not 'woken up and smelled the roses' and done like every online music store. Have short, low-bitrate clips of the tracks.
It is great that there is such a community, but it is very very 'closed' and doesn't reach the wast majority. I'm not the least surprised that they want more visitors
[deleted]
Of course, it's the artists that have the last word and it's up to them to say OK or not. But seriously... i can't fantom anything other than 'its their loss'.
Even if a show is long or not, I as a listener can use a sample to check if its something that i might be interested in.
Just as if I go to a online music store and check out Britney Spears, I would know (by ~95% chance) that if i'm a hardcore deathmetal fan it will probably not be in my interest to download her stuff.
If the show is 1hour or 4 hours, it doesn't matter. It would still give me a feeling of the content of what i'd be downloading.
One user might not download Artist X content because he was 'decived' by the sample. But 10 might instead get his stuff Because of the sample.
Anyways, I can understand the artists have strong feelings on stuff like this. "I want to be judged by the whole package" etc, etc. But Artists are Arists, they are not known for good PR. And it would undoubtably, unquestionably be in their interest to slack a bit on their pride and learn from the industry (and what most end users want).
This is of couse just my opinion, but I personally have used their service very little because of this exact issue. People I've spoken to (artist and regular music listeners) have almost exlusively the same POV.
heh, ugh. This was a long post. Hopefully i didn't voice too much BS
As to the complaint about lossless compression -- archive.org is also now serving as a hub for many net labels as well, all of which use either ogg or mp3. Quality of encoding varies, but there are hours of excellent and free music to be discovered with more or less something for everyone.
Archive.org Netlabels (http://www.archive.org/audio/netlabels.php)
just wanted to say thanks for the post and reminder
herefornow
My main argument for some kind of preview would be so I can hear what the live recording itself sounds like.
Wow! This has grown a lot since I've last looked at it. If you have any chance check ot the Fugazi shows they have.
Thanks for reminding me, TrNSZ.
dev0
If you have any chance check ot the Fugazi shows they have.
Yeah that's right, Fugazi is great. I saw them live playing here in the Netherlands in the early 90's three times or so.
I downloaded both shows featured (~1 GB ) and it brought back sweet memories for me.
Thanks TrNSZ
[span style='font-size:7pt;line-height:100%']..what a difference a little difference would make... (from Blueprint)[/span]
I found something nice.
http://www.archive.org/audio/audio-details...id=camomille034 (http://www.archive.org/audio/audio-details-db.php?collection=camomille&collectionid=camomille034)
[deleted]
Even a good, LAME-encoded MP3 (--r3mix -b32 -B320) sounds pretty darn good. But using a Lossless codec would be even better.
[deleted]
Well, I would think that one of the problems, is the limited selection of groups and tunes that are availible there.
Just my opinion
[deleted]
I suggest them to pay for 150-200 and enjoy BitTorrent, instead !
Ok, TrNSZ.. I'll try that out. No need to get "Snooty". I'm new here and been using that setting for awhile, but would like to find better settings (and preferably a near-lossless setting). I like LAME alot, and it's been a killer codec since I started using it.
I prefer VBR, not this ABR stuff.. If it can compress it smaller and keep the quality, I'm all for it.
In your honest opinion, TrNSZ, what are the best "Non-Preset" VBR settings for LAME (20kHz Max Cutoff)? I'd like to keep the 32-320kbit flexability.
[deleted]
I've been looking into Nero LC-AAC. I would like to maintain compatibility with my MP3 CD Player and my Jeep's Computer System (running WinXP Pro).
Is there a solid DirectShow Codec for Windows Media Player? Also, does Nero LC-AAC support cover art?
[deleted]
Ugh. I'm definitely repelled by the huge filesizes. I love lossless FLAC compression, but having to download a 1GB+ ZIP file, unzipping that mass, then listening to it just to see what one show sounds like? God no.
Ugh. I'm definitely repelled by the huge filesizes.
Follow the Download Options link for each show to see FTP settings. You can download individual tracks by FTP, to check sound quality, etc.
The bands I've looked at on the Archive have (mostly working) pointers to their own web page and generally have mp3 samples so you can at least figure out if you like their style.
I have noticed that a lot more bands I know are on links from etree that are either bittorrent (which I think is Windows only) or have a contact list (maybe people who only trade "hard copy" cdr's?). Is this due to a difference in the permission terms, or just that they haven't been submitted to the Archive? All listings in question only allow files from bands that allow taping.
BitTorrent isn't Windows only at all! It was originally written in Python and there are still Python clients around.
[deleted]
edit: Question was answered while I was writing... thanks
Azureus is a bittorrent client written in Java and works afaik on all platforms.
not only is it ultra portable, its also by far the best BT client imo.
I'm surprised by the total lack of Grateful Dead and Phish shows, which I presume is due to their contractual obligations. Oh well, I suppose Leftover Salmon and Aquarium Rescue Unit are some solace.
The Achives there are awesome, I have gotten a great deal of excellent music there. I just start my downloads to run when I am not going to be around and come home to great music.
Thanks for the nudge to have a new look-see at their recent additions.
There is also a compiled BitTorrent client for Unix and Mac OS X, giving it some wide platform support. I've been totally pleased with it's performance here.
OK, I got a python version which runs on Linux, though the status display is a little sparse compared to the Windows version I tried, I guess it runs just as fast as long as you don't want "superseed"mode.
THe next question, since these programs take a while and you would like to stay on after to upload your share... Is there a version that doesn't require a GUI? It would be nice to leave it running and have the console available for other family members.
Hint: The orginal Win32 client (and all forks of it, such as the "experimental" one or ABC) are also written in Python.
This seems like a really great site, thanks alot for the heads up.
Downloaded a few tracks from a Tenacious D concert and it sounds very good. I think the way it's setup is great, you can get individual tracks so I'm not sure why people are complaining, I guess it's not really dial up friendly. I like the way it's setup to be burnt straight to cd. Thanks again mate.