Park it in the muthaf*%^*n Shade!

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Album Reviews / New Releases Discussion
-- Park it in the muthaf*%^*n Shade!
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »

Posted by SMC on Nov-16-2007 19:15:

quote:
Originally posted by refuge
I love this track. Been waiting months for its release. This is much more my style than Coma. I can't wait to drop it in my sets.

I really don't see what's so special with it, it contains almost nothing. I could make a track like this in an hour or two.

Posted by PoisonJam19 on Nov-16-2007 21:00:

Don't like this track. It has a few interesting synths, but overall it's an annoying song. Coma isn't much better either.

Posted by bas on Nov-16-2007 21:23:

quote:
Originally posted by SMC
I really don't see what's so special with it, it contains almost nothing. I could make a track like this in an hour or two.

Do it.

edit // also, have better artwork plz

Posted by nsamadi on Nov-16-2007 21:32:

quote:
Originally posted by bas
Do it.

+1....and then we'll compare.

As for the track....seems a bit watered down for some reason....sounded better when Sasha plays it...probably Abletoned it.....Filters and stuff.

Posted by Clovis on Nov-16-2007 22:05:

quote:
Originally posted by nsamadi
+1....and then we'll compare.

As for the track....seems a bit watered down for some reason....sounded better when Sasha plays it...probably Abletoned it.....Filters and stuff.

No, the reason it sounds watered down is because the mastering is so shit and it clips so much, the beautiful bassline/kick marriage that makes the track sound so good is practically gone...

I think buying the wav version might be better, but I dont want to try and end up paying for 2 copies of a track that clips horribly...

Posted by SMC on Nov-16-2007 22:15:

quote:
Originally posted by bas
Do it.

edit // also, have better artwork plz

lol

Posted by OxigenReleased on Nov-17-2007 07:36:

quote:
Originally posted by nsamadi
+1....and then we'll compare.

As for the track....seems a bit watered down for some reason....sounded better when Sasha plays it...probably Abletoned it.....Filters and stuff.

I felt exactly the same way when i buyed Coma...... In the sets was a mofu..... blast, but the single left me waiting for that something special that made me put on the earphones and blast the volume to the max.................

I guess Abletoning tracks live with the Maven has its dissapointments to the fans eh?

Posted by OxigenReleased on Nov-17-2007 07:38:

quote:
Originally posted by Clovis
No, the reason it sounds watered down is because the mastering is so shit and it clips so much, the beautiful bassline/kick marriage that makes the track sound so good is practically gone...

I think buying the wav version might be better, but I dont want to try and end up paying for 2 copies of a track that clips horribly...

Bare with me, im a Newbie for christ sake, but, what do you guys mean with "It Clips so much" and "Clipped Track"?

Posted by SMC on Nov-17-2007 13:28:

quote:
Originally posted by OxigenReleased
Bare with me, im a Newbie for christ sake, but, what do you guys mean with "It Clips so much" and "Clipped Track"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipping_%28audio%29

Posted by RJT on Nov-17-2007 16:27:

Not a fan. Doesn't do anything for me in the least.

Posted by Ted Promo on Nov-17-2007 16:30:

haha, I just now noticed the clipping. Maybe that's one of the reasons why this track sounds so bland. Other than - y'know - everything else like the melody and structure and all that jazz.

Posted by mphreak on Nov-17-2007 18:11:

quote:
Originally posted by nsamadi

As for the track....seems a bit watered down for some reason....sounded better when Sasha plays it...probably Abletoned it.....Filters and stuff.

+1

Anyway, I like COMA more.

Posted by rory21 on Nov-19-2007 12:08:

The clipping is bad news. We should all write to Beatport tell them we want another mastered copy or my 2 bucks back!

Posted by iammesol on Nov-19-2007 23:43:

quote:
Originally posted by Ted Promo
Maybe that's one of the reasons why this track sounds so bland. Other than - y'know - everything else like the melody and structure and all that jazz.

I love both Coma and Park It In The Shade, but because of his new tracks' length, odd structure, and lack of melody I'm beginning to feel like Jake (idoru) and Prydz

Posted by Clovis on Nov-21-2007 01:53:

Beatport are officially a bunch of fucking knobs.

quote:

Response 11/16/2007 11:24 AM
Unfortunately, our research concludes the intended audio for this track is intact. This is one of our top downloaded with no errors reported. I actually own the track and sounds perfect.

For good measure, we have re-authorized the download in your Beatport Account Library under �Ready to Download�. To enable the download, please check that your security settings allow pop ups and permit the transfer. To ensure its completion we recommend tracks be downloaded one at a time. Please know you will not lose other pending downloads by doing so. Our site also gives a 4-hour availability window for attempted transfers in your �Re-Download� tab located in your library.

If you have any other questions please contact us again.
Thank you

Yeah thanks, I can re-download it again, that sure helps me out.

Posted by nsamadi on Nov-21-2007 02:02:

quote:
Originally posted by Clovis
Beatport are officially a bunch of fucking knobs.

LOL..did you properly explain to them about the clipping, etc...sometimes I'll have to tell them 2 or 3 times till they get something right.

I bought a track with a mess up at the end....they said the same thing to me..until I wrote another anger message back..like "you stupid deaf...etc.....listen to the last 2 seconds"...

I pretty much had to say it like that until they found the error and gave back my money.

Posted by jupiterone on Nov-21-2007 02:05:

Beatport probably doesn't even know what clipping is.

Posted by Clovis on Nov-21-2007 02:09:

quote:
Originally posted by jupiterone
Beatport probably doesn't even know what clipping is.

And the guy obviously doesn't play anywhere beyond his laptop speakers...

Am I really going to have to take a fucking screenshot of soundforge and post that up for him to get it? jesus.

Posted by bas on Nov-21-2007 02:22:

quote:
Originally posted by Clovis
Beatport are officially a bunch of fucking knobs.

Same thing happened with a track I bought a while ago. The total length was about 5 or 6 mins...but around the 3.30 mark the song would just stop. Wouldn't even continue playing, if I tried to scan past that point my computer would lock up. I e-mailed them and that's the exact response I got minus the "I downloaded it myself".

Posted by idoru on Nov-21-2007 02:23:

You guys actually expected different?

Posted by Dj_Es-Dva on Nov-21-2007 02:28:

I really loved Coma, but this sounds just abismal, i thought minimal techno was meant to be repetitive... i dont see anything good about this tune bar the name maybe.

Posted by Clovis on Nov-21-2007 02:49:

This is minimal techno? lol

Posted by nsamadi on Nov-21-2007 03:39:

Overall, the guys at Beatport are dumb..you have to REALLLLLY explain something till they get it..I highly recommend the screenshot.I would also love to see a better copy of this as well.

Posted by bas on Nov-21-2007 03:59:

They could be right, that might just be the way the WAV was sent to them. It's not like the encoders do any type of mastering, probably just run a script to convert from WAV to 320 and post to the sever

Posted by plaxx on Nov-21-2007 04:23:

quote:
Originally posted by bas
They could be right, that might just be the way the WAV was sent to them. It's not like the encoders do any type of mastering, probably just run a script to convert from WAV to 320 and post to the sever

It has to be --

The alleged Digweed mix recorded at Club Jade has PIITS as an opening for one of the parts, and it has the same clipping issue, which leads me to think that it's not beatport, but infact the way it was mastered.

Has anyone heard this in a club yet? Maybe its one of those crazy, on-purpose ideas from that crazy Sasha.. crazy guy.

Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »