REC
Active topics
  1. I think we're all good here

    I got some very constructive feedback and I am grateful for that!
    It is good to hear various opinions and I am really a pragmatic at heart:

    LSMelo asked for the Berlin 4 remaster in lossless, so let's see if we can make that happen!

    Cheers everyone!
  2. such a fun thread! apart from the fact that most of your remasters sound much worse to me than the source recordings your main argument seems to be that you deliver what the mass asks for: mp3s. because those get higher downloads. you seem to go crazy about this. well then, congrats for a couple thousand downloads from mostly deaf people. smart move filling demands of the mp3/youtube/stream generation. whatever a serious taper/sound editor/video editor does: he or she has a different audience in mind. I heard the live streams were of higher quality originally but people complained about the high dynamic range. well great idea then by u2gigs to swap higher recording gear for much worse gear to fill the people's demands. streams, mp3s, mobiles...that should all be forbidden in my opinion.
  3. There is one thing I have in common with Olli!
  5. ^^ please stay on topic everyone.

    This thread is u2start "approved" and "we" know that a lot of people appreciate the sharings here.
    Too bad I can't make everybody happy, but hey, such is life.



  6. I had to stop posting in this thread for my blood pressure's sake... but I still enjoy reading the redundant arguments here. But now I'm throwing in my final two pesos. There is still a small market for all you for profit bootleggers and your high quality recordings out there. Old cats like me that spent tons of cash in the 80's and 90's for "silver pressed" are mostly over it in the new digital age. MP3 may not sound as good, but I can have every show. You can argue your superiority over someone all you want. BigGiRL does this as a hobby and like any other selfless U2 gets more reward out of sharing her hobby with all of us. And (most) of us are extremely grateful for it. Enough said. Take your self aggrandizing somewhere else and let it be. I get it... You take it seriously. You do high quality. Share some of it with us and let us decide...
  7. Amen blueEYEDboy!
    BIGgirl is a MVP. Thanx for your enthusiasm and hard work.
    (and thanx for the MP3's, I like the files 'fast & furious')
  8. Originally posted by blueeyedboy:[..]





    I had to stop posting in this thread for my blood pressure's sake... but I still enjoy reading the redundant arguments here. But now I'm throwing in my final two pesos. There is still a small market for all you for profit bootleggers and your high quality recordings out there. Old cats like me that spent tons of cash in the 80's and 90's for "silver pressed" are mostly over it in the new digital age. MP3 may not sound as good, but I can have every show. You can argue your superiority over someone all you want. BigGiRL does this as a hobby and like any other selfless U2 gets more reward out of sharing her hobby with all of us. And (most) of us are extremely grateful for it. Enough said. Take your self aggrandizing somewhere else and let it be. I get it... You take it seriously. You do high quality. Share some of it with us and let us decide...
    good to see your name popping up again, don't be a stranger

    But yeah let's stay ontopic.


  9. just as you can with lossless files ... i've got two 2TB hard drives full of live shows, more than 400 data dvd full of shows in flac too, and i've got enough to listen to for more than my life's duration so space isn't an issue, neither is download speed nowadays, there's no real reason for anyone to stay with mp3. there might have been a reason ten years ago when most media player weren't able to decode flac properly but it's not a problem anymore since it's now a recognized format that is able to be read by pretty much any player (even my 4 years old android phone reads them natively).
  10. Originally posted by JulienLossless:[..]


    just as you can with lossless files ... i've got two 2TB hard drives full of live shows, more than 400 data dvd full of shows in flac too, and i've got enough to listen to for more than my life's duration so space isn't an issue, neither is download speed nowadays, there's no real reason for anyone to stay with mp3. there might have been a reason ten years ago when most media player weren't able to decode flac properly but it's not a problem anymore since it's now a recognized format that is able to be read by pretty much any player (even my 4 years old android phone reads them natively).
    If you've got the storage and the time and the know how... More power to you. Maybe 30 years of going to rock shows have my diminished my hearing, (the dinosaur days when people didn't wear helmets to ride a bike or earplugs to concerts... ) but the energy it takes (for me anyway) isn't worth the slight difference sound (again... to my old ears). It's a matter of choice at the end of the day and I really just don't get why it needs to be argued.
  11. Well, there actually is!

    Mp3's are more environmental friendly than flacs.
    This has to do with the energy and water consumption of the data centres used when downloading.*

    Not that it is going to stop global warming if we all stop using flacs, but if you want to be "green," then use mp3!

    Another reason is for iPod use. I like to listen to my iPod and therefore I need mp3's.
    ____________________________________________________________________

    *See, Bora Ristic, Kaveh Madani and Zen Makuch, 'The Water Footprint of Data Centers', Sustainability 2015, 7(8), 11260-11284. url= http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/8/11260/htm

    "Outbound DC data traffic generates a WF [water footprint] of 1–205 liters per gigabyte
    (roughly equal to the WF of 1 kg of tomatos at the higher end)."
  12. i'm sorry but that's probably the worst argument I've ever seen in this endless debate, but at least you almost made me choke on my Pringles™ out of laughter if it helps you feel any better.