TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Producers Promotion
-- forum rules
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

forum rules

Hello fellow TAers-

I love this forum but I have a really big probem with one of its rules: the fact that there are boundaries (strict boundaries at that) about posting links to tracks which are less than 96kbs.

First off I think this is entirely way out of line. With the amount of sketchy people on the internet, there would be no way I'd ever give a tune out above 96k (like NO way), as I've heard stories of people all of a sudden just hearing their track on the radio and then it be by some random artist. Or likes its already happened here, someone's tune getting put on overnet.

What I mentioned above is a good enough reason not to have 96k+, and samples being 160k+. But the fact that even samples have to be 160+ is even worse. If its a sample of an uncompleted track, it could easily be chopped and looped, boom its stolen---especially at 160kbs.

Now, why on earth should a forum board have the right to tell the artist, the person who spent all the time making his track how he should present it to an audience?? And even at that, this board does not have its own hosting system in the first place.

I think that it's a good idea to be able to have songs at 96k +, but realistically, its unsafe, its unfair, and it shouldn't have to be a rule anyways.

see that is good, however, if you are posting a track and asking for feedback, it is difficult to give accurate feedback when a track is in 96 k as the quality is not very good so it is hard to judge certain parts of the song. they do make exceptions to this rule ifyou are going to send it to a label or something, but it is really up to the artist to post whatever bitrate they want. i mean, even if you play a 128 file off a cdr live, it sounds shitty.

You could always put an intentional "error" in the track, something that will make it impossible to use live (just fade it out and speak over a bit of it or something).

It would be a lot easier for somebody to then give feedback on your track, as the track would be in a decent enough quality to comment on mastering and EQ'ing, the quality of the synths etc.

As long as you mention in your thread that the "error" is on purpose it shouldn't be a problem. I know I'd find it a lot easier to disregard this when reviewing than to disregard low quality.

You mention that the board has no right to tell an artist how to encode their file, remember that posting on this forum isn't compulsary I know it says "Amature Producers Promotion" but I think (for the most part) it's used by the regulars as a way of getting feedback and advice on their production skills, and not as a means to advertise their work.

since the forum isn't about advertising your own work, but more to get comments on your work... it's not really any meaning in posting a 96kbit sample.. or even a 128kbit sample since the quality isn't good enough to comment on.... you can only comment on the structure and what you think of the melodie.. that isn't really much..

and as said.. put an "error" in it...

The whole purpose of this forum is to post your track get comments about it, as well as to give some feedback to others.
Now do you actualy think that giving any cunstructive critisizem is possible when your posting a clip of a bitrate that low?


All you are doing by posting those clips is causing that threads by people who post their finished tunes which they worked hard on to fall down to the buttom of the page.

i don't see your point about saying , someone will use your high quality sample in a live set..

i would love that, means he/she likes my tune so much, that he/she would even use a sample in a live set..

now is that great feedback or not ?

well like i said, my production partner had a 128 of one of his tunes on his website..which the link to his website was in his signiature on a few forumboards. someone listned to it, chopped it, looped some parts exactly, put vocals over it and he heard it on the radio a few weeks later- direct rip. its happened so many times that its not even worth risking it.

putting in sets is one thing, but when you get music stolen from you, you want to take more precaution.

but why is it a RULE that you have to post over 96? thats fine if its easier or nicer to give feedback on a track with higher bitrate, but what i have a problem with is the fact that its a rule around here and you will get your threads deleted if you do post lower.

quote:

Originally posted by broken silence well like i said, my production partner had a 128 of one of his tunes on his website..which the link to his website was in his signiature on a few forumboards. someone listned to it, chopped it, looped some parts exactly, put vocals over it and he heard it on the radio a few weeks later- direct rip. its happened so many times that its not even worth risking it. putting in sets is one thing, but when you get music stolen from you, you want to take more precaution. but why is it a RULE that you have to post over 96? thats fine if its easier or nicer to give feedback on a track with higher bitrate, but what i have a problem with is the fact that its a rule around here and you will get your threads deleted if you do post lower.

It's not difficult to prove copyright on your work. You say it's happened so many times (people stealing a loop and making a tune to play on the radio).....I've never once heard of it happening.

I think the rule is there for the reason DJ-Kreing^^ gave. It's impossible to rate a tune at that low a quality, you'd just get replies saying "can't tell if it's any good, post a better version" so even if the rule wasn't there, it would be completly pointless on your part to post such a low quality mp3.

I really feel you are worrying over nothing, if you heard a tune you made on the radio you would be easily able to prove you made it as you would have all of the original files.

(edit: not to mention that if you posted it on here first, you'd have a lot of people able to testify that you made it long before the other version appeared, so in a sense you're nearly as well protected as by not posting it at all)

totally agree with broken silence.... ok so if people find it hard to make feedback for the artist thats the artists loss. no one elses. i think that the rules are only enforced because people are trying to take advantage of the artists on this forum. some times i have no problem with sharing a full track at high quality, because im fairly laid back about it. but others do, and i completely understand why they do. i think it is very out of line to have the boundaries set by the admins of this forum. i love this forum but i think its stupid that this rule exists, as the only rational explation for its existance seems to be that people want to take advantage of other peoples tracks and play them out in their sets etc. if they artist is not happy about this, but still wishes to share, i think he/she should have the right to in whatever way they want to, wether it be 19 kbs, or 192 kbs, if people really find it hard to coment on the track when its shared at low quality then they dont have to comment, and comments on the melody and structure can still be giving! the only person loosing out by sharing a low quality rip is the artist, so let it be, its an unfair rule.

mike

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Foyle totally agree with broken silence.... ok so if people find it hard to make feedback for the artist thats the artists loss. no one elses. i think that the rules are only enforced because people are trying to take advantage of the artists on this forum. some times i have no problem with sharing a full track at high quality, because im fairly laid back about it. but others do, and i completely understand why they do. i think it is very out of line to have the boundaries set by the admins of this forum. i love this forum but i think its stupid that this rule exists, as the only rational explation for its existance seems to be that people want to take advantage of other peoples tracks and play them out in their sets etc. if they artist is not happy about this, but still wishes to share, i think he/she should have the right to in whatever way they want to, wether it be 19 kbs, or 192 kbs, if people really find it hard to coment on the track when its shared at low quality then they dont have to comment, and comments on the melody and structure can still be giving! the only person loosing out by sharing a low quality rip is the artist, so let it be, its an unfair rule. mike

your beeing selfish here, looking only from your own intrest ffs.

you don't get the big point behind this do ya? and one more thing, you don't like the rulez, then don't post here ..thank you.

I gave this example tons of times, someone posting a track or sample in 64kb saying hey i finished track, getting signed on blabla..well good for you.

But that person is screwing the layout with his stupid sample, for people that love to produce, who worked hard on a tune and posting it in full glory..its' called NOT FAIR!.

Let me put it this way, you got a tune but you don't wanne share because it is getting signed? dont post it at all ..are you afraid its getting stolen? don't post it all, you do wanne share? follow these rulez.

period.

I just joined the forum, and I was wondering how many cases of stealing other than the one listed above has anybody actually experienced....In other words is it really a big enough risk to worry about posting tunes??

MIROSLAV

the regulars use the forum to get feedback on the tracks they have made

many dont even post up the finished product completely, they come on the forum get the feedback finish their track and then make a short sample of it with all the criticism they have gotten from the board

ive posted up a few tracks and havent worried once and believe me theres been better tracks posted up here than mines that havent been ripped off

to name but a few, george hales, john o'callaghan, mk-s, icone + myself are all signed artists on this board and have posted full 192k+ versions of tracks past, present and future.

posting is not compulsary, if you don't want to share your track because it's being released then don't, the forum is not here to openly share your track with armin and pvd, it's a forum where up and coming artists post to seek feedback on their productions, only 1 artist (well, duo) has posted on this forum and been picked up by a label because of it.

if you cast your mind back 6 months ago, there was the best part of 2 pages of incomplete songs with samples ranging from 24k to 96k, it was rediculous, something had to be done, these guidelines were set in place because of that. there was absolutely no point in people seeing others doing it, copying it and therefore becoming the norm. i mean, "my first trance production" and inside a 90 second sample at 64k.

the only real problem left to deal with is people posting just to pad their post count, "nice tune" the whole point of the forum is about feedback and people getting arsey about that too is still an issue. maybe i'm gonna take a fellow mod's advise and, well, wait and see what happens

Or you can keep your link open for just a few days or so... (Don't know if that's allowed though).

I totally agree with luke here, there has to be some sort of rule in place to stop stupid posts at ridiculous samples. If you're not happy doing this, even with some 'faults' added, then I think you need to think twice before posting honestly

Well it looks like im not going to change anyones mind here, so i'll just follow the rules. i just think that i shouldnt *have* to

i just dont think something at like 64k is that bad, i participate at dancetech.com as well and its only lofi (soon to be hifi too) and has been for the 4 years ive been there..just never been a problem and we comment on mixes etc all the time.

quote:

Originally posted by broken silence Well it looks like im not going to change anyones mind here, so i'll just follow the rules. i just think that i shouldnt *have* to

You don't have to. As people have already said, posting here is not compulsary; it's a priviledge.

quote:

Originally posted by broken silence Well it looks like im not going to change anyones mind here, so i'll just follow the rules. i just think that i shouldnt *have* to i just dont think something at like 64k is that bad, i participate at dancetech.com as well and its only lofi (soon to be hifi too) and has been for the 4 years ive been there..just never been a problem and we comment on mixes etc all the time.

well then, good bye here, and have fun on dancetech.com

if you wanne post 96 quality, post the fulltrack minus Outro..that is allowed. but samples? please..no.

quote:

Originally posted by Mario432 I just joined the forum, and I was wondering how many cases of stealing other than the one listed above has anybody actually experienced....In other words is it really a big enough risk to worry about posting tunes?? MIROSLAV

I can assure you this happens very rarely, if at all.

You must realise however, posting a full version of your track will cause it to spread. The fact is, this forum is designed mainly for those not at a signable level to gather advice and improve.

If you are at a signable level, then posting a full version is probably not a good idea if you are concerned with it spreading.

You don't like the rules, you don't post.

We get enough tunes without you as well.

quote:

Originally posted by broken silence Well it looks like im not going to change anyones mind here, so i'll just follow the rules

Steal my work I'd love to hear it on the radio :P

I just cleaned my Amateur MP3 archive, and the few low rate samples really sucked. I hope I don't have to delete any more of them.

quote:

Originally posted by Massive84 your beeing selfish here, looking only from your own intrest ffs. you don't get the big point behind this do ya? and one more thing, you don't like the rulez, then don't post here ..thank you. I gave this example tons of times, someone posting a track or sample in 64kb saying hey i finished track, getting signed on blabla..well good for you. But that person is screwing the layout with his stupid sample, for people that love to produce, who worked hard on a tune and posting it in full glory..its' called NOT FAIR!. Let me put it this way, you got a tune but you don't wanne share because it is getting signed? dont post it at all ..are you afraid its getting stolen? don't post it all, you do wanne share? follow these rulez. period.

Sorry but i dont see whats not fair about it, i didnt realise that the main problem was posts clogging up the forum, i thought it was just fussy people who were trying to take advantage of producers. But i think its pretty out of line to say im being unfair if i only want to post a low quality clip of my tune, its a taster. I dont see where fairness comes into it. but i kinda see the whole point behind the rule now, i didnt before, it just seemed like a bit of a selfish scam, and i wouldnt have mentioned it if broken silence hadnt bought it up because i thought no one would agree! hehe.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Foyle Sorry but i dont see whats not fair about it, i didnt realise that the main problem was posts clogging up the forum, i thought it was just fussy people who were trying to take advantage of producers. But i think its pretty out of line to say im being unfair if i only want to post a low quality clip of my tune, its a taster. I dont see where fairness comes into it. but i kinda see the whole point behind the rule now, i didnt before, it just seemed like a bit of a selfish scam, and i wouldnt have mentioned it if broken silence hadnt bought it up because i thought no one would agree! hehe.

if 10 people make 10 topics saying hey listen to my 30 seconds 64kb sample, means the 3(for example) people who posted their full tracks will get pushed down to page 2-3..now lets be fair, how many look at page 2 of this section?

and like i said, you wanne post low quality coz your afraid? post 96 full track minus outro, how can this be stolen?

quote:

Originally posted by Mike_Foyle Sorry but i dont see whats not fair about it, i didnt realise that the main problem was posts clogging up the forum, i thought it was just fussy people who were trying to take advantage of producers. But i think its pretty out of line to say im being unfair if i only want to post a low quality clip of my tune, its a taster. I dont see where fairness comes into it. but i kinda see the whole point behind the rule now, i didnt before, it just seemed like a bit of a selfish scam, and i wouldnt have mentioned it if broken silence hadnt bought it up because i thought no one would agree! hehe.

I think your point of view on "taking advantage of producers" isn't correct, it is not at all the case here, Mike. It could be "unfair" in a sence of "common sharing" when some producers share the full 192 version, and others don't. But that's not the case either.

Real quality reviews contain comments on mastering, eq-ing, the real pro shite, which is IMO the most difficult but so important part in producing. One can't give these comments on 96 or sometimes even 128 kbps tracks! You do want to know what still lacks about your tracks.

I don't like hearing crappy sounds from my speakers. So I make sure I don't play bad quality.

Another thing is, you need to have good and trained ears if you want to be a quality producer. It's good to listen to other (amateur!) tracks often and learn from their skills. That's not done with bad quality tracks.

In short:

Pro: you get way better feedback; it's way more comfortable for the reviewer. (and the reviewer actually learns more from your stuff as well IMO)

Contra: Chance 1 in a million some part is ripped. Ow dear.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.