I'm not a DJ but... - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Music Discussion
-- I'm not a DJ but...

Posted by Hurock on Feb-11-2009 00:23:

I'm not a DJ but...

Yeah, I'm wondering if it's really worth paying for some good tunes even if it's just for my own music library. I know that I can listen to a lot of tunes on youtube, but I prefer to own the songs. The big problem is the price, a song on iTunes is 0.99$ and on beatport or djdownload it's around 2.00$ for a single tune.

Actually, I'm listening to this album and I'm really interested in buying it, but will I be wasting my money?

Posted by RickyM on Feb-11-2009 00:30:

23 full length tracks for a tenner, not bad. As for tracks, the quality on youtube is often shit. How about you save a bit of money and only buy the tracks you really want?

Posted by adi_hanson on Feb-11-2009 00:32:

Re: I'm not a DJ but...

quote:
Originally posted by Hurock
Yeah, I'm wondering if it's really worth paying for some good tunes even if it's just for my own music library. I know that I can listen to a lot of tunes on youtube, but I prefer to own the songs. The big problem is the price, a song on iTunes is 0.99$ and on beatport or djdownload it's around 2.00$ for a single tune.

Actually, I'm listening to this album and I'm really interested in buying it, but will I be wasting my money?

When i was 18-19 , i used to have to pay �14.99 ($29.99) for an album , so 99.c sounds about right , plus it would be much better quality than utube

Posted by woscar on Feb-11-2009 01:36:

The difference in price between iTunes and Beatport, DJ Download, Audiojelly, Juno, and other digital download sites is quality. They offer 320 kbps CBR files while iTunes doesn't.

Why would paying for music be wasting money, anyway?

Posted by Adam420 on Feb-11-2009 02:04:

Buy albums and comps, I guess, those are usually worth it. I see your point, as you seeing single tracks and EPs being DJ tools, but if you really like a track then go for it.

Posted by miamitranceman on Feb-11-2009 02:35:

Obviously if you don't DJ you wouldn't need the best quality tracks out there (unless you're an audiophile in general). That said, there's nothing like a crisp/clean track, even if you're just listening casually.

Posted by whiskers on Feb-11-2009 02:40:

even if I didn't DJ, 320kbps sounds awesome. Must be at least 192. Plus, most of youtube videos are mislabeled, incomplete, low-quality samples. And you have to wait for them to load (especially in high quality).

Posted by idoru on Feb-11-2009 06:09:

Pay for it. If you like it, why not give something (and I use this word very loosely, because of the very small percentage that the artist will actually see) back to the person who made it?

Posted by Darkarbiter on Feb-11-2009 10:25:

quote:
Originally posted by miamitranceman
Obviously if you don't DJ you wouldn't need the best quality tracks out there (unless you're an audiophile in general). That said, there's nothing like a crisp/clean track, even if you're just listening casually.

no