TA INVASION - [ Demo Submissions ]

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- TA INVASION - [ Demo Submissions ]

Posted by dEsidEL on Sep-23-2003 21:15:

TA INVASION - [ Demo Submissions ]

Hey everyone!

First and foremost, just wanted to say thanks again to everyone for coming out to TA INVASION 004 last Friday night at System Soundbar. It was a great party and I hope you all had tons of fun!

Please click here to view some of the pictures from the night!

As most of you know, John (E2EK1EL) are I are always accepting demos from all the TOTA DJ's out there interested in playing at a future TA INVASION. If you are one of these people you can submit your demo in three ways:

1. IN PERSON

Saturday, September 27, 2003 - en-Trance v03 @ Volume Lounge
[ask for John, Emery, or DJ Eso by the DJ booth]

Every Friday @ System Soundbar (VIP Room)
[ask for John]

2. BY MAIL

Emery aka. dEsidEL
c/o 1NT3RF3R3NC3 PRODUCTIONS
PO BOX 3166
STN Industrial Park
Markham, ON
L3R 6G5

3. BY ICQ/MSN

Contact me at [email protected] for more info.

If you already have demos available online please feel free to post the links in this thread and we will make every effort to download it and listen.

I will also be posting a thread in the coming weeks that will feature a great collection of the various demos that we've been receiving from all the TOTA DJ's to allow everyone an opportunity to download and listen to some of the great talent that we have here.

The next TA INVASION event has been tentatively scheduled for mid-November (date still to be confirmed). Unfortunately due to obvious time constraints we are limited to the number of DJ's that can be booked for a single night. If we are unable to accomodate a set time for you please bear in mind that there is always a possibility that you may be invited to play at a future event. We would also like to encourage all aspiring TOTA DJ's to participate and stay active in the TA forum discussions as it always helps people put a name to a face and moreover helps maintain your recognition as a Tranceaddict showing your support to this site and our community. Everyone is encouraged to come out and support. Remeber it's the support itself that will help continue these events happening!

Thanks,
E2EK1EL & DESIDEL

Posted by Matt on Sep-23-2003 21:26:

*sigh*

oh when I turn 19...

Posted by dEsidEL on Sep-23-2003 21:28:

quote:
Originally posted by Mosaic
*sigh*

oh when I turn 19...

MAtt, just send one anyways. I'll try and post it along with everyone else's set. Just because you aren't 19 doesn't mean that you can't play at events. Besides there are venues out there which aren't all 19+.

Posted by Skipper on Sep-23-2003 22:01:

Emery, do you need another from me?

I'm still trying to get enough space on my harddrive to convert my wav file demo to mp3 so I can send it to ya via MSN.

Posted by ryanm on Sep-24-2003 13:40:

quote:
Originally posted by Skipper
Emery, do you need another from me?

I'm still trying to get enough space on my harddrive to convert my wav file demo to mp3 so I can send it to ya via MSN.

why would you want to do that. You'll lose a lot of the quality. And yes it will be noticeable

Posted by rahvin on Sep-24-2003 14:00:

maybe because she can't ICQ him a 700meg file? heh

Posted by Skipper on Sep-24-2003 17:04:

quote:
Originally posted by ryanm
why would you want to do that. You'll lose a lot of the quality. And yes it will be noticeable

Because it's too big to to host anywhere as a wav file, basically.

Posted by nick_energy on Sep-24-2003 17:19:

quote:
Originally posted by Skipper
Because it's too big to to host anywhere as a wav file, basically.

try to use some prog covert ur wav file to mp3,I'm sure u will get less than 100meg for a set

Posted by dEsidEL on Sep-24-2003 23:55:

it's ok guys .. i have Sarah's 2nd demo on CD and i'm gonna convert it to mp3 .. should be around 80-90 megs at 160 kbps sample rate ..

Posted by Skipper on Sep-24-2003 23:59:

quote:
Originally posted by dEsidEL
it's ok guys .. i have Sarah's 2nd demo on CD and i'm gonna convert it to mp3 .. should be around 80-90 megs at 160 kbps sample rate ..

Oh yes! The second one - the 80 min one, with track markers in it.

I'm not particularly proud of the two CDs I first gave John back in July.

Posted by Arsalan on Sep-25-2003 01:59:

i have a demo also but i have no host maybe i can upload it to your ftp or something ??

you can add me to msn and i could send it : [email protected]

Posted by drgoodvibe on Sep-25-2003 02:08:

i defy anyone to listen to a cd.. and an mp3 coded @ 192kbs to be able to tell the difference!! well unless there a true audiophile like HARDCORE type..

Posted by Crazy Serb on Sep-25-2003 03:08:

Posted by calldown on Sep-25-2003 04:05:

I beg to differ. I dunno, I have cd's which have MP3's on them, and I have CD's straight from labels so nice clean copies. I notice that when I listen to them (on nice clean crisp monitors mind you) the feeling's different. I have next to no ear training or that so I can't quite pick up if it's frequencies or that, but it feels... maybe muddled or so? Kinda like the difference between vinyl and CD, but less so.

Maybe I'm just crazy. Oh well, I'll be in my nice little radio studio tomorrow with nothing to do... might as well run a test.

-calldown

Posted by dEsidEL on Sep-25-2003 04:10:

quote:
Originally posted by drgoodvibe
i defy anyone to listen to a cd.. and an mp3 coded @ 192kbs to be able to tell the difference!! well unless there a true audiophile like HARDCORE type..

it's tru .. very hard to differentiate ..

i wonder how everyone here would do if we ran a real random test .. he would be kinda interestin actually ..

Posted by DigiNut on Sep-25-2003 18:01:

r3mix.net ran tests back in the day. I don't know if the site is up anymore. But they did controlled (blind) tests with both the original CD's and MP3s that were properly ripped and encoded at 192 kbps, and nobody was able to tell which was the original.

Having said that, there are a lot of MP3s out there that aren't ripped or encoded properly, and that's why some people might hear the difference.

Technical: A CD sounding "better" is often just psychological. 256 kbps for MP3s is said to be the hard limit at which no one has ever been able to consistently identify the original in a blind test, and in fact, if you compare the waveforms and their frequency spectrums, they are essentially identical.

Hope that clears it up.

Posted by ryanm on Sep-25-2003 18:49:

Posted by dEsidEL on Sep-25-2003 19:04:

quote:
Originally posted by ryanm
I can hear it!!!

Ryan ur a dawg

Posted by DigiNut on Sep-25-2003 19:41:

quote:
Originally posted by ryanm
I can hear it!!!

No... you can't. Unless you can hear canine frequencies like Emery says.

If a track is ripped properly, with jitter and error correction, off of a good CD that isn't scratched or smeared, and encoded at LAME 192 kbps, 16 bit, stereo, best quality factor, with a lowpass filter at 21 kHz, nobody I've ever met can tell the difference.

A CD itself is only sampled at 44 kHz, so for anyone who's studied DSP, the Nyquist theorem states that no frequencies above 22 kHz can come out of it. We're talking about a range between 21 and 22 kHz that might distort; even hi-hats aren't in that frequency range. The only thing I can possibly think of would be white noise or hiss, and you don't hear that in tracks.

Anyway, you boys can claim whatever you want about MP3 quality if it makes you feel better, but unless you're dogs or cats, chances are you're fooling yourselves.

Posted by dEsidEL on Nov-07-2003 23:48:

Attn: all TOTA DJ's

1NT3RF3R3NC3 PRODUCTIONS is compiling an email mailing list for all DJ's. If you are interested in receiving important updates and other pertinent information regarding future events, pls. email: [email protected] with your PRIMARY email address and ensure that the return address is not junk filtered.

Thanks