[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Rip Van Winkle wrote:
If it is not listenable or watchable it is worthless IMHO.[/QUOTE]
Amen, amen!!!
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=#FF399> Linda Of The Valley wrote: [/QUOTENAME]lol bresnki.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=#CC0066>SomebodyToLoveMe wrote: [/QUOTENAME]*picks up Linda's eyes*
[/QUOTE]
can I have my eyes back? :P [/QUOTE]
here linda i caught somebody to love on a street corner trying to flog your eyes!! the cheak of it, but dont worry.. lucky i had 37pence in my pocket, so i bought them back, i tell ya somebody to love can haggle!! she wanted 38pence for the two but 2 hours later i got them for 37p, here you go, *pushes linda's eyes back in* keep still....... ouch.... ooo plonk..plonk there we go:)
*rolls eyes* lol
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=#CC0066>SomebodyToLoveMe wrote: [/QUOTENAME]*picks up Linda's eyes*
[/QUOTE]
can I have my eyes back? :P [/QUOTE]
here linda i caught somebody to love on a street corner trying to flog your eyes!! the cheak of it, but dont worry.. lucky i had 37pence in my pocket, so i bought them back, i tell ya somebody to love can haggle!! she wanted 38pence for the two but 2 hours later i got them for 37p, here you go, *pushes linda's eyes back in* keep still....... ouch.... ooo plonk..plonk there we go:)
*rolls eyes* lol
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]John S Stuart wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Rip Van Winkle wrote:
If it is not listenable or watchable it is worthless IMHO.[/QUOTE]
Amen, amen!!![/QUOTE]
Oops double post.
If it is not listenable or watchable it is worthless IMHO.[/QUOTE]
Amen, amen!!![/QUOTE]
Oops double post.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]John S Stuart wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Rip Van Winkle wrote:
If it is not listenable or watchable it is worthless IMHO.[/QUOTE]
Amen, amen!!![/QUOTE]
If your Hectics tape has poor audio quality, Can you give that worthless piece of trash to me then? Pretty Please. LOL
If it is not listenable or watchable it is worthless IMHO.[/QUOTE]
Amen, amen!!![/QUOTE]
If your Hectics tape has poor audio quality, Can you give that worthless piece of trash to me then? Pretty Please. LOL
No need to start this discussion again, but...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=green>Bren<font color=orange>ski wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
3. if it was recorded 30 yrs ago on a cheap woolworth's cassette recorder then the only 'loss' you're likely to get by encoding in mp3 is a bit of high-end tape hiss [/QUOTE]
...this is absolutely not true. Saying that mp3 encoding works like 'hiss-reduction' is ridiculous.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=green>Bren<font color=orange>ski wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
3. if it was recorded 30 yrs ago on a cheap woolworth's cassette recorder then the only 'loss' you're likely to get by encoding in mp3 is a bit of high-end tape hiss [/QUOTE]
...this is absolutely not true. Saying that mp3 encoding works like 'hiss-reduction' is ridiculous.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]tilomagnet wrote: [/QUOTENAME]No need to start this discussion again, but...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=green>Bren<font color=orange>ski wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
3. if it was recorded 30 yrs ago on a cheap woolworth's cassette recorder then the only 'loss' you're likely to get by encoding in mp3 is a bit of high-end tape hiss [/QUOTE]
...this is absolutely not true. Saying that mp3 encoding works like 'hiss-reduction' is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
wtf? i didn't fucking say that - i said the EXACT opposite - i said LOSS - read again. mp3 is supposed to be 'lossy' i was trying to explain what that loss might be in this instance....
try and read what i typed, please. the point i'm making - for anyone who doesn't understand. is....the FLAC version of the same file may 'lose' the tape hiss that the mp3 still retains....and what i am saying is that i think that on something 30yrs old that sounds like it was recorded inside a biscuit-tin - the tape-hiss that is lost because it was recorded in the ever-so-superior FLAC is not worth having - because it won't make a crap tape any better. it's probably much better to save the hard-drive space and use mp3 where soemthing is poorly-recorded to begin with.
but, alas - i can't help it if you can't read and understand english - then that's your problem ;-)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=green>Bren<font color=orange>ski wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
3. if it was recorded 30 yrs ago on a cheap woolworth's cassette recorder then the only 'loss' you're likely to get by encoding in mp3 is a bit of high-end tape hiss [/QUOTE]
...this is absolutely not true. Saying that mp3 encoding works like 'hiss-reduction' is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]
wtf? i didn't fucking say that - i said the EXACT opposite - i said LOSS - read again. mp3 is supposed to be 'lossy' i was trying to explain what that loss might be in this instance....
try and read what i typed, please. the point i'm making - for anyone who doesn't understand. is....the FLAC version of the same file may 'lose' the tape hiss that the mp3 still retains....and what i am saying is that i think that on something 30yrs old that sounds like it was recorded inside a biscuit-tin - the tape-hiss that is lost because it was recorded in the ever-so-superior FLAC is not worth having - because it won't make a crap tape any better. it's probably much better to save the hard-drive space and use mp3 where soemthing is poorly-recorded to begin with.
but, alas - i can't help it if you can't read and understand english - then that's your problem ;-)