On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 04:29:33 -0500, Bismarck <bnwink@hotmail.com> wrote:
>On Mar 12, 2018, The Mad Doctor wrote
>(in article<s3tdad5hnd8lccnfnh7ct6fos5mkeo7en8@4ax.com>):
>
>> two questions:
>>
>> You put AATW as your #2 fav... who's #1 ??
>>
>> and, just curious... are/were you a Ray Charles fan?
>>
>> As you may have figured out.... all though I do one hell of a lot of
>> "quality" posting... it's mostly in MP3 (or dozens
>> of reasons) and usually only post lossless if (a) in my opinion the
>> difference is remarkable and/or (b) someone has
>> asked for sumpin'.
>>
>> Gawd! after the mess I saw this morning (in either the 60's or 50's mp3
>> group) from two of the self-appointed God's
>> (for that group) were one is posting (f you can believe it) 64kbps crap and
>> the other (who has sworn for years that
>> he/she only posts legit CDs and NEVER, EVER up converts) made a big boo-boo
>> and accidentally posted hi/her "work folder"
>> with all the sub-par bits and pieces he/she was obviously using to "create"
>> the contents of a requested CD.
>>
>> anyway.. after seeing that mess I hate to remain associated with that group.
>> I'd love to call out both of them but am
>> not in a trollish mood and don't need to get flamed for the next month or so.
>>
>> Okay... sorry... end of my daily rant :(
>
>#1 would be Willie Nelson. Ya, I know, lately quality is an issue. I fell in
>love with Red Headed Stranger and I was hooked.
>
>I have an extensive Ray Charles collection. Fine performer.
>
>Flac is Flac, you almost always get the quality you expect, and it is
>I rip something to MP3 to put on the player in the car, I use 256. When I
>download MP3 I prefer to get 320.
The "rage" had to do with bandwidth (a term that didn't even exist back in the day) and, of course, storage.
Funny as it may seem (or sound) I usually rip to Flac then down convert to 48000hz Mp3. To my old ears, there's a slight
difference between that and the "default" 41000. I also stay exclusively with CBR.
Like I've stated... posting, to me, is not (as I'm sure it is to some) and ego trip or a "my collection is bigger than
yours" type of thing... I post for one reason only... to "share" the music I enjoy with as many "out there" as
possible... that means the target audience is (like it or not) the mp3 crowd.
Unfortunately, while I refuse to lower my own standards, a good portion of that crowd, the leechers and trolls, can't
tell the difference between 320 and 64... as demonstrated by some posts in the 60s group over that past 2-3 days.
So.. for example, for this guy I know named Bismark.. I post things (mainly to lossless country and 50-60s) that I think
he'd appreciate before I push the delete button on the Flac portion of the rip.
Anyway... Enjoy today's little AATW post. Got a couple more I don't see on your list (most of which I have).. When
time allows I'll be double checking your list to see what I might be missing. keeping in mind that new albums don't
always mean new tunes. Yes, I do take into consideration re-recordings, different "versions" and live vs studio.
take care
TMD
|
|