How do you get your music?

[Joey]

torrents and itunes for me. and some rare times i buy cds if there is some awsome album artwork and if im proud of supporting the artist full power.

also started using soulseek. kinda nice.

I used to use Soulseek, but it became a chore to get people to let you browse their library.

 

[Seth]

If you're getting albums in one RAR then chances are it's not good quality.
btw, RARing MP3s/FLACs/etc is a futile process as music is generally extremely compressed. The only thing it does is put them in one file.

Most are 128-196 kbps and that as or above cd...A few are 320 kbps..

They start from 60-120 mb so they vary in size...DOnt understand why everyone so hung up on the quitly.I seen most of your step ups havent seen many people use anything above $90 pc speakers..and I alot of there headphones are not much better.

 

[Serideth]

Most are 128-196 kbps and that as or above cd...A few are 320 kbps..

They start from 60-120 mb so they vary in size...DOnt understand why everyone so hung up on the quitly.I seen most of your step ups havent seen many people use anything above $90 pc speakers..and I alot of there headphones are not much better.

I have no idea what the fuck you're saying towards the end of that post, but if I'm going to listen to something I want it to sound as good as it can, I spend almost every free minute of my life listening to music when I can, so why settle for second best?

 

[futuregator15]

Most cd are just one rar file...Not sure what your talking about..

Yea, i know. What i was trying to say was unless i download a rather large (not always music) file split into chunks then my overall download speed doesn't go over 250 KB/s. When I download in chunks then it gets around 1 MB/s

EDIT:

They start from 60-120 mb so they vary in size...DOnt understand why everyone so hung up on the quitly.I seen most of your step ups havent seen many people use anything above $90 pc speakers..and I alot of there headphones are not much better.

WTF??? Where did that come from. To answer you though, i like my high quality bose speakers and headphones. Never would go back to the apple ones unless i had to

 

[Chathurga]

Most are 128-196 kbps and that as or above cd...A few are 320 kbps..

They start from 60-120 mb so they vary in size...DOnt understand why everyone so hung up on the quitly.I seen most of your step ups havent seen many people use anything above $90 pc speakers..and I alot of there headphones are not much better.

Explain "that as or above cd", if you're saying CDs are just above 192 CBR then do I have a shocker in store for you...
I'm not even go into the quality comment, I've stated my opinion on the matter a couple of times.

 

[Seth]

Yea, i know. What i was trying to say was unless i download a rather large (not always music) file split into chunks then my overall download speed doesn't go over 250 KB/s. When I download in chunks then it gets around 1 MB/s

EDIT:


WTF??? Where did that come from. To answer you though, i like my high quality bose speakers and headphones. Never would go back to the apple ones unless i had to

I really dont know you that well..But I said most....Alot of people here and in the general public dont use your caliber of headphones..

To me and almost everyone out there 192 and maybe 128 is fine. And that is what you would find in many .rar files posted on blogs..Where all not Hideo Kojima who cant stand anything lower than uncompressed PCM audio...

Today is just not my day on these forums..

 

[Craig Fairfax]

Most are 128-196 kbps and that as or above cd...A few are 320 kbps..

They start from 60-120 mb so they vary in size...DOnt understand why everyone so hung up on the quitly.I seen most of your step ups havent seen many people use anything above $90 pc speakers..and I alot of there headphones are not much better.

I use my surround sound system as a PC speaker. And I used Mackie hr624mk2 studio monitors before.
But to be fair I can't see the fascination people have with FLAC. I compared it to a CD I ripped, and I don't know if it was just that CD in general or what. But the only difference is that one took up far to much space.

 

[Chathurga]

FLACs are just bit (not wave) compressed CD rips. They almost always are anyway, not point in transcoding lossy audio into FLAC.
Their main use is archival, so no matter what new lossy codecs come out you'll always have the loseless source to encode from. Transcoding from lossy to lossy really messes up quality, especially if you do it more than once. It's just like video encoding.