Guys since Napster is going subscription, any good competito

[pr-man 1]

?

 

------------------

Celeron II 566@952 on a Abit BH6 Rev 1.01, 192 Pc100, Matrox G450 32 DH,

SBlive Value, Supra Express 56i ISA, Win98SE

[INFERNO2000 0]

be honest. What's wrong with a subscription? I'm not sure how much it costs, but if it were 20 bucks a month, that'd still be very reasonable if you used it...

 

1 CD vs hundreds to thousands of MP3s.

 

I'm perfectly happy with the idea of it being subscription based.

 

------------------

My PC is warm. I think our fire wall is acting up.

[ThC 129 0]

Yeah there is a program its called IRC, learn to use it like all the other people that have been getting Mp3s before Gayster even came out. There are also programs like audiogalaxy (www.audiogalaxy.com) plus others too im sure. Or just get Napigator which will connect you to free OpenNap servers rather than the regular napster ones. You can get napigator probably from download.com or just do a search for it.

[Son_Gohan 0]

No Way! MP3 sharing service is something users choose to do. I don't want to pay for sharing my MP3 with anybody else. It's my computer, and Internet is not property from Napster.

 

The only problem here is the RIIA,SGAE, and many other "Musicians" asociations. They care for the copyright, but they don't care about the unfair prices of music CD's. Mastering a CD costs lest than a euro, therefore, why should I pay 15 times more.

 

I know musicians need to make money from their songs...but I disagree with EMI, Time Warner...and other companies which apply high prices to products. Actually, the only people who make benefit from this system are not musicians, but disco firms.

 

And I don't want to pay for a Music format that has lower quality than a CD!

 

PS:

try gnutella.org

or www.filetopia.com

[INFERNO2000 0]

You're paying for the service napster provides, not the mp3s themselves...

 

but oh well.

IRC would be the main choice--people have been doing it for years.

 

and what do you mean CD-quality vs. mp3 quality.

 

Aren't they all the same thing-digital?

 

same recording quality, from what I've seen.

 

as long as you get a good rip, it's usually dificult for the naked ear to tell a BIG difference.

 

------------------

My PC is warm. I think our fire wall is acting up.

[felix 0]

OKay,

The difference is thus:

CD's are recorded at 172kbps/44khz.

 

Thus the only mp3 files that capture even close to CD quality are those encoded at 192/44.

 

DAT uses 48khz so they are even higher quality.

 

My main problem with most mp3s is that they are done at either 128 or 160 kbps meaning that there is a certin amount at the top and bottom of the bandwidth that although you can't hear, still affect the music.

 

Think about it. Everything has a resonant frequency which causes inferences with everything else, now when CD is recorded in a stuio, the recording gets every resonant frequency in the studio, so if you cut out some of the "unhearable" frequency, it still affects the music.

 

This is why vinyl is so much better than CD as all of the ambient noise - or lack of is recorded and nothing is left out - unlike CD's which still cut some but not all.

 

I may have some facts wrong here so if you know where I'm wrong, please correct me as I want to be sure I'm not misleading anyone.

[Son_Gohan 0]

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You're paying for the service napster provides, not the mp3s themselves... </font>

Napster can not be really considered a service. It just keeps a list of mp3 files that users have, but it doesn't really provide 'mp3'.

The users are the ones who make napster important, and beleive me, if they don't want to pay, napster will soon go down, as everybody will go to alternative and free services.

[now 0]

www.winmx.com

 

 

------------------

Now inc.

http://www.now-incorporated.com

[clutch 1]

In a single pass playback of the master, vinyl *may* be better than a CD. However, you have to copy from the master to other albums to make them. Just the friction alone wears off the higher frequency cuts that you mention (that's if the needle-arm assembly is sensitivy enough to work with it). After multiple passes with normal-above normal equipment, you will lose quality of the recording. In addition, whatever signal you get from the vinyl has to pass through an equalizing amp, which in most systems is a class B switching-type amp and will pass it's own noise down the line. Now, if you get a high-end turntable/needle/preamp/amp combo, then you may get several passes of the album that are better than CD (provided there is no dust in the environment). But for the price, I would rather get a Super CD player from Sony, and just not worry about it.

 

 

Oh, and as far as near-CD quality of 128KBPS, how many people in this forum have the equipment that could faithfully reproduce anything higher, let alone hear it if they did.

 

------------------

Regards,

 

clutch

[Son_Gohan 0]

Quote:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">But for the price, I would rather get a Super CD player from Sony, and just not worry about it.</font>

What is better: Super Audio CD or DVD-audio?

[ThC 129 0]

reguardless of what your supposed to be able to hear and what you can't i can easily tell the difference between a 128/44 and a 192/44 compressed Mp3. All i listen to is Trance/Dance music and you can easily tell the difference in the sound quality of the music. As for reproduction at higher quality that is why you use the Radium Fraunhaufer codec, it is the best Mp3 codec you can get right now.

[clutch 1]

Son_Gohan:

 

Here's a couple of links for ya:

 

http://www.sel.sony.com/SEL/consumer/sacd/static/faqs-faqs.html

 

http://www.sel.sony.com/SEL/consumer/sacd/static/download.html

 

And here's the search link that has these and a lot more:

 

http://www.sony.com/cgibin/search.cgi?col=sony&qs=super%20cd&nh=10

 

 

 

------------------

Regards,

 

clutch

[Pythagoras 0]

Hmm... mebe I should read threads b4 I post one... anyway I am a devotee of gnutella. And until recently I thought it was cool - except there were no good clones - then I found bearshare (www.bearshare.com). And bye bye napster!