Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 11-21-2012, 03:38 AM
Son of Kalas Son of Kalas is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melbu Frahma View Post
Some songs have since been removed, as I recall; I know that's at least partially the reason. Lemme find the changelog for you.

Found it right here.

I'm sure staff can give you a more in-depth explanation. Hope that helps though.

thanks dude
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

Please register to remove the above advertisement.
  #102  
Old 11-27-2012, 08:39 PM
Urpgor Urpgor is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
lossless quality

Hi guys!

Just registered to post this - huge fan...
Im really looking forward to a version with lossless quality. Doesn't have to be .wav . I would even prefer .flac files because of the tags and their size. Lets face it: In a couple of years when every smartphone will have 500GB or more space mp3 will be a thing of the past. I know most people don't seem to hear the difference between mp3 and cds, probably because of in-ear headphones, but for a multimedia enthusiast with a good speaker system the difference is imense.
Fujifilm just anounced that by 2015 they will have blurays with several TBs capacity.
File size for music won't matter anymore (if the music keeps getting released in stereo instead of multichannel, which sadly is much more likely). Please consider encoding .flac instead of vbr or 192kbits mp3. Some Albums on your site already feature a .flac download....
Please also consider to make availabity of .flac versions mandatory for future releases...
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 11-27-2012, 08:57 PM
Bahamut's Avatar
Bahamut Bahamut is offline
Wesley Cho, Moderator, Maverick Rising/Serious Monkey Business Director
Sheng Long (+10000)
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Mountain View, CA, United States
This is a bit of an offtopic discussion, but...

I don't see mp3s disappearing so quickly - I'm quite satisfied with the quality of 192 kbps mp3s, and storage is still an issue these days. I have about 900 GB of music and it's always growing - I haven't even actively seeked out music much in the past 5-6 years or so.

Sure, storage has gotten cheaper, but now the trend has been to move towards SSD for storage since a wall has been hit with SATA hard drives, and with that shift, storage is still incredibly expensive.

Combine the quality being amenable to almost everyone, storage still not cheap enough, lossless files taking up too much space, and the music industry being highly resistant to file format changes, and you have mp3 likely to be the defacto standard for a long time, if not permanently (at least until quantum computing becomes commercial at the consumer level or something major like that). I'm not convinced that FLAC (or any lossless) will ever become mainstream due to those factors.
__________________
Liontamer: AND THEY HAVE A PLAYPLACE
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 11-28-2012, 12:53 AM
Urpgor Urpgor is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
I did not want to drift offtopic, but to finish:
If a bluray in 2015 will have 1TB space and lets say will cost 50$ plus another 50$ for a second one as a security backup + the drive for 150$, you will have to spend 250$ to save all your music on discs - nowadays 2TB HDDs cost around 90$ - image the price in 2015 - you could already fit your complete music collection on a single hdd even if it were 2 times the size of what it is now.
I'd rather convert flacs into aac for mobile devices than have mp3 only....
That said it comes down to personal taste and it was not my intent to start a big discussion.
All im saying is:

It would simply be awesome to have a flac download option for every ocremix.That way everyone could choose between flac and mp3 for his/her -self.
More options are always better right ?!

Last edited by Urpgor; 11-28-2012 at 01:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 11-29-2012, 03:55 PM
Calatia Calatia is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut View Post
the trend has been to move towards SSD for storage
I understand the benefits of SSD drives, but the primary use for them is certainly not for storing large files. Its main purpose is to be the drive the operating system is installed on, which allows for the computer to start-up significantly faster. The trend is to have at least two drives, the second of which being a high capacity HDD for storing personal files. This is true for a majority of new desktops and laptops available on the market today.

Storage is extremely cheap these days. You can get a 2TB drive, external or internal, for around $119 if you know where to look. Over the years I've purchased a number of drives for additional storage, because they are so very affordable. While I may be the exception to the rule, right now my combined storage capacity across all drives is 11TB.

Music is one of the primary functions of my computer, so why should I use the same file standard I was using fifteen years ago? My entire music library is lossless, and while the music industry as a whole may not be making the switch in the foreseeable future, many digital retailers are. I've grown extremely fond of sites like Bandcamp and Topspin for offering lossless download options.

It makes sense to keep direct downloads as low-quality MP3 files, because of server costs. However, I do not see the harm in offering a torrent of all of the lossless music that has been acquired as a part of this update. There could even be future "bumper pack" torrents for newer remixes at full lossless quality.

Last edited by Calatia; 11-29-2012 at 04:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 11-29-2012, 06:02 PM
Bahamut's Avatar
Bahamut Bahamut is offline
Wesley Cho, Moderator, Maverick Rising/Serious Monkey Business Director
Sheng Long (+10000)
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Mountain View, CA, United States
I should clarify - my music collection is ~900 GB of mostly mp3s - storage is still not cheap enough to justify lossless in general, and at some point I will delete all lossless copies I have since I quite frankly cannot tell the difference in quality from lossless and 192 kbps, and I would label myself as better qualified than most casual listeners.

The arguments for lossless in the past decade have been weak at best for anything but archival/master copy purposes given the benefit/cost ratio and widely accepted solutions.
__________________
Liontamer: AND THEY HAVE A PLAYPLACE
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 11-30-2012, 03:50 AM
Calatia Calatia is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut View Post
quite frankly cannot tell the difference in quality from lossless and 192 kbps
I can easily tell the difference between lossless and lossy, especially with a bit rate as low as 192 kbps. This also greatly depends on the audio equipment you are using, if you are using crappy speakers or headphones, the difference may be negligible.

Storage is absolutely cheap enough to justify lossless files. Anyone with a broadband connection and a halfway decent capacity hard drive can easily download gigabytes of data without even making that big of dent to their free space. Gone are the days of having to over-compress files just so your could store them on floppy disks.

As I said before, music is one of the main functions of personal computers today, so why be so conservative with space when we aren't with other file types? I much prefer a video that is 1080p or 720p than to one that is 480p. The standard screen resolution, and therefore background image size has nearly tripled, and those are just JPEGs. Photoshop project files are another area where storage space isn't an issue because there is a preference for quality over quantity. Even the standard portable music player can hold several dozen albums at lossless quality, more music than you can even listen to with a single charge.

I hope your own personal preferences aren't dictating how others should store and enjoy their music. Just because you wrote off lossless music for yourself, doesn't mean you should write it off for everyone else just because you can't tell the difference.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 11-30-2012, 04:13 AM
Neblix's Avatar
Neblix Neblix is offline
Nabeel Ansari
Mother Brain (+4000)
OC ReMix Artist Profile
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Jersey
The blatant problem with trying to pull a FLAC torrent together is that hundreds of mixes would be left out, due to people losing project files (thus not being able to render wavs to convert) and people just either not responding to emails or have left OCR in general.
OCR is not some team or company, it's just a bunch of random, friendly people submitting songs.

So as ideal as it sounds, it's probably never going to happen.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 11-30-2012, 04:20 AM
Bahamut's Avatar
Bahamut Bahamut is offline
Wesley Cho, Moderator, Maverick Rising/Serious Monkey Business Director
Sheng Long (+10000)
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Mountain View, CA, United States
It's not - there's plenty of evidence to suggest that claims of being able to tell the difference are dubious. Double blind tests have been done comparing listeners' ability to tell the difference and convincingly debunks the hypothesis that self-proclaimed audiophiles can tell the difference (with at least one such test resulting in such audiophiles actually performing worse than others).

It's not really personal preference so much as practicality & benefits being marginal, and if you asked most people, I'm pretty confident you would find that they would agree with me. If they weren't, you would not see such overwhelming popularity of mp3s at around the 192 kbps level or maybe a little higher and a huge clamor/migration towards FLACs. Mp3s on portable mp3 players have replaced the CD player for many people. There is too much evidence that the general public does not agree with your sentiment - if it did, there would be ample opportunity commercially, and it is just not there.
__________________
Liontamer: AND THEY HAVE A PLAYPLACE
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 11-30-2012, 04:23 AM
Calatia Calatia is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neblix View Post
The blatant problem with trying to pull a FLAC torrent together is that hundreds of mixes would be left out
So? Personally, I'd rather have a selection of lossless remixes, than none at all. If some remixes are lost due to circumstances then there is nothing that can be done about it.

One other benefit to lossless files is the ability to down-convert, while still retaining any information tagged to the file. If you want to up-convert, you have to go back and find a lossless source, down-convert to the bit-rate and file format of your choice, and then re-tag all of those files over again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut View Post
There is too much evidence that the general public does not agree with your sentiment
First of all, a majority of the general public are completely unaware of the difference between file formats and bit-rates. If a song is available on the iTunes Store and they can download it and listen to it in a matter of minutes, that is all they care about. If more people were educated on the matter, and if mainstream digital marketplaces offered lossless options, you can be damn sure a lot more people would opt for those files. Your general statement that the general public only cares about MP3s is skewed because that is all they've ever known since the days of Napster.

I am also not trying to be a deterrent for anyone who is content with lossy audio, because that comes down to a personal preference.

The discussion in this thread has gone off course, and I'd like to put it back on course. For these new torrents, Liontamer sought out and obtained several lossless files from remixers. Now, since those lossless files have been obtained, what would be the harm in sharing those files with the community in the form of a torrent?

Last edited by Calatia; 11-30-2012 at 04:40 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.