![]() |
|
|
|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5 pounds for .MP3?
Quote:
(to be honest vinyl is an even older dying archaic art form...)
__________________
i will not be confused (with another FAN) https://bigscreensatellite.borndirty.org |
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5 pounds for .MP3?
I too would like to see a lossless format release as it does make a difference to me. I don't like the way the OP put it, pretty rude considering how much Underworld do for us, their fans. However if it doesn't make a difference to you whether you can discern the difference between 192kbps mp3 and a lossless format such as flac, that doesn't mean that no-one can tell the difference. I have a reasonable pair of speakers and a above average amplifier (quad) and there is a massive difference to me between the two music formats.
Obviously the whole service is still experimental, but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for a lossless format release, so that we can encode it as and when we want to. As someone else said it's kind of a step backwards to offer new releases in something less than CD quality. As to things like bandwidth it's always possible to offer things via a bittorrent server. Perhaps when you purchase a release you get a unique torrent file paired with a key and you download the lossless release that way. |
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 5 pounds for .MP3?
Quote:
My thoughts on the .mp3 vs. .flac discussion: We should consider ourselves lucky that only the file format is "crappy", not the music itself. Ever thought about all those people out there having to deal with this issue? I pity them, really. |
| Post Reply |
|
|