|
Airbase - Genie 2 (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| dEEkAy |
| track sounds very ID&Tish from what i can recognize in that mud of 11khz sounds ;) |
|
|
| Luke Terry |
| quote: | Originally posted by Massive84
I see that luke changed the rulez? very weak luke, iv seen people posting WAY better samples with their signed music(mk-s , haak, sean tyas etc.)
Well it is your bad indeed, and no your not friendly, your bitrate sux, what is there to share or to hear? So please explain me your kindess, you never reviewed one tune here, and comes posting in the lowest bitrate i have ever seen on TA.
It's not childish it's my opnion. |
must have missed this post first time round. the rules have not been changed, the only changes to the rule thread were to add new ones, then to condense it to one post. you can even look they haven't been edited since aug 18th.
nobody complained when haak posted the asot rip of sonic breeze, it wasn't 32k, but the point still stands
|
|
|
| Wicked Neo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Airbase
Well, Im not posting to get comments on mastering or equalizing, and i find it hard to believe that thats the first thing that people wants comment on also.
I posted 64 kbps demos earlier, and i've had DJs playing them out on clubs. Thats why. |
Are you serious? how often has this happened?
i find it hard to belive that someone would play a 64kbps rip in a club. it must have sounded horrible!
anyway, jezper, don't take that as a dig, it's not, i just find the idea of someone playing a 64kbps rip in a club so ridiculous.
I can fully understand why you posted the track in the low bit rate that you did, yes ppl will rip the track and play it if the whole track was posted here in say 192kbps, but also those that have posted in this thread make some valid points, it could have been posted in a higher bit rate but edited to make it unuseable by anyone trying to rip it.
You posting samples of your tracks is very much appreciated, please don't stop because of some of the comments in this thread, but also take on board some of the more constructive comments like higher bit rate so the sample can be judged better but voice over or something else on it to make it useless to anyone wanting to take it and play it elsewhere.
I support Luke's decision in keeping this thread open and allowing the lower bitrate sample to be posted, it has served its intent by allowing jezper to get some feedback on his track but we should also learn from this thread from those constructive comments made and all of us need to bear that in mind when posting future threads with samples in.
now instead of bitching about the low bit rate, maybe jezper can re post a higher quality sample, edited of course and he can get some valid feedback.
|
|
|
| Jay M |
Neo, you have been so politically correct, and that's in this case very correct.
Amen.
:D |
|
|
| carl-b.mine.nu |
I say...
let everyone post whatever they want as long as you say which quality it is.. then its up to the ppl if they want to listen or not... the same way its up to the producer if he wants to post a thread or not...
now stop bithin' around! |
|
|
| kewlness |
the thing is, this forum used to be filled with low 32 kbs samples until some rules were enforced.
My opinion is, that no matter whether you just started producing yesterday, or you have been producing for 10 years, rules are rules and they should be followed.
To either side of the argument, hope we can all shake hands and get along now. There is no need for bitterness with one another.. |
|
|
| Pimp_fu |
| Just a suggestion to keep the peace, Haven't we all demo'd software synth's at one time or another, you know, the ones that emit the God awful BEEEP! every minute or so? the same could always be done with a demo. |
|
|
| Airbase |
| Sample updated, now you have a 192kbps 2 min sample, which wont give you anything really... You really mean you want this instead of a full track in less quality? |
|
|
| Pimp_fu |
| I was alright with the first version, but DAMN, now I want more. What hoops do I have to jump through? Mastering was excellent, Creamy groove, incredible instrumentation. Saying the production is spot on doesn't do this track justice. Wow. GREAT stuff |
|
|
| Ian^ |
| quote: | Originally posted by Airbase
Sample updated, now you have a 192kbps 2 min sample, which wont give you anything really... You really mean you want this instead of a full track in less quality? |
imho opinion jezper, I think it gives a better idea, though evenat 128kbps would've been considered fine. I was sent a 128kbps sample of one of the Active Sight tracks from Fred Baker, and even with a 59 second sample, I knew I had to go out and buy the track as soon as I could, so I can see it from both sides. Don't find it as a personal attack on your productions, as I think your most recent release was excellent anyway ;) just that we want to keep a fair playing field :) |
|
|
| Vizay |
now I'm satisfied :D
but I believe you have a point to airbase when you say that 2 minutes doesn't show much.
an idea for a rulechange might be that if your track is pending at a label (and you can prove it in some way) you are allowed to post a sample lower than 96kbps as long as you post a part of the track in full quality. That way everyone gets what they want huh? :) |
|
|
| Airbase |
Thanks!
After reading the whole topic now, i believe the best idea for the future (at least for my samples), is to put it out in 96kbps and put some vocal copyright sample over the track every minute or at cruitial places. Would that be accepted?
// Jezper |
|
|
|
|
