Vinyl Purists Go To Hell - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- USA - West Coast / Las Vegas
-- Vinyl Purists Go To Hell
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Posted by DJFaded on Sep-15-2005 18:27:

Vinyl Purists Go To Hell

Should we make them go????

Posted by Electrophile on Sep-15-2005 18:32:

I voted "Please Leave"

Posted by buchnaner on Sep-15-2005 18:39:

voted please leave only b/c most vinyl purists have a bad attitude re: digital. i have no problem people using vinyl, but get bent if you talk shit about digital

Posted by Electrophile on Sep-15-2005 18:55:

quote:
Originally posted by buchnaner
voted please leave only b/c most vinyl purists have a bad attitude re: digital. i have no problem people using vinyl, but get bent if you talk shit about digital

+37!!!!

Posted by Clovis on Sep-15-2005 19:23:

Fuck vinyl...its all about bongos and tambourines...

Posted by DJ_Sudden on Sep-15-2005 19:26:

Leave.

Posted by DJFaded on Sep-15-2005 20:05:

quote:
Originally posted by Clovis86
Fuck vinyl...its all about bongos and tambourines...

Ummm.. Its all about your mom.... then bongons and tambourines.

Posted by NiteMer on Sep-15-2005 20:13:

From someone who was a vinyl purist, I can't really hold anything against them. I still think people should be able to mix both formats. I play a lot of cd now, but I still will carry vinyl in my bag as well. Some gigs don't lend themselves to digital either, if there isn't adequate equipment for it.

Posted by bas on Sep-15-2005 20:39:

pff...without vinyl none of you would be where you are today, let's not forget that

guess it doesn't matter either way, but ALL cds could get just a little un-fun

Posted by jethro on Sep-15-2005 20:40:

I have no problem with vinyl purists, they are just limiting themselves. Why limit yourself to either medium alone or any other for that matter, ive said it before, embrace all mediums when appropriate.
digital/vinyl/software/casio keyboard/speak n spell/ipod/cell phone/etc.

Posted by bas on Sep-15-2005 20:58:

quote:
Originally posted by jethro
/speak n spell/

shit...now everyone probably thinks im fucking crazy for laughing at a computer

Posted by jethro on Sep-15-2005 21:03:

quote:
Originally posted by dj_bas
shit...now everyone probably thinks im fucking crazy for laughing at a computer

Posted by Thriller on Sep-15-2005 21:29:

quote:
Originally posted by jethro
/cell phone/etc.

How much could you charge for that lol?

Posted by jethro on Sep-15-2005 21:45:

quote:
Originally posted by Thriller
How much could you charge for that lol?

if you have the skills to make use of it whatever is the standard rate.

anyone here besides me old enough to remember kraftwerk using pocket calculators in their live performances back in the day?

Posted by Junior Chavez on Sep-15-2005 21:48:

quote:
Originally posted by dj_bas
guess it doesn't matter either way, but ALL cds could get just a little un-fun

i agree vinyl is simply way more fun. nothing wrong with digital, but vinyl is king in my book

Posted by St. Michael on Sep-15-2005 22:35:

Did anyone notice that Audiojelly has started to charge �2.40 for 320kbps tracks? That's $4.33 per track. Digital compressed files are starting to catch up to vinyl pricing.

Posted by bas on Sep-15-2005 22:42:

quote:
Originally posted by St. Michael
Did anyone notice that Audiojelly has started to charge �2.40 for 320kbps tracks? That's $4.33 per track. Digital compressed files are starting to catch up to vinyl pricing.

they sell different compression rates for different prices? why wouldn't someone just get the lowest one and recompress?

Posted by Junior Chavez on Sep-15-2005 22:45:

quote:
Originally posted by dj_bas
they sell different compression rates for different prices? why wouldn't someone just get the lowest one and recompress?

lol you're lame. the lowest bit rate tracks ARE MISSING DATA... you don't understand compression very much do you?

Posted by St. Michael on Sep-15-2005 22:47:

Once the file is compressed, the quality is degraded/compromised forever.

Posted by Junior Chavez on Sep-15-2005 22:49:

quote:
Originally posted by St. Michael
Once the file is compressed, the quality is degraded/compromised forever.

precisely.

Posted by bas on Sep-15-2005 22:54:

quote:
Originally posted by Junior Chavez
lol you're lame. the lowest bit rate tracks ARE MISSING DATA... you don't understand compression very much do you?

oh, i used the wrong words then

lets say you buy the 192 kbps version, you can always convert to a higher compression. then the computer magically finds this missing data which is actually stored in a meta file that comes with the mp3

trust me i'm a doctor

Posted by DJ Shibby on Sep-15-2005 23:47:

quote:
Originally posted by St. Michael
Did anyone notice that Audiojelly has started to charge �2.40 for 320kbps tracks? That's $4.33 per track. Digital compressed files are starting to catch up to vinyl pricing.

No problem, let them get greedy and destroy their market just like the RIAA did.

What a shame..

Posted by Junior Chavez on Sep-16-2005 00:30:

quote:
Originally posted by dj_bas
oh, i used the wrong words then

lets say you buy the 192 kbps version, you can always convert to a higher compression. then the computer magically finds this missing data which is actually stored in a meta file that comes with the mp3

trust me i'm a doctor

lol yeah you can get a 192kbps and recompress to a 392kpbs... but it just magnified the shitty sound cuz it already had data missing....

so you could in theory DO THAT. but it still sounds like a crappy 192.... cuz the same data is present.

Posted by Orbital32 on Sep-16-2005 00:32:

I love my technics. I also love my CDJ

Posted by Electrophile on Sep-16-2005 00:43:

quote:
Originally posted by DJ Shibby
No problem, let them get greedy and destroy their market just like the RIAA did.

What a shame..

Soul Seek anyone?

Pages (2): [1] 2 »