[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]tgunn2760 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
LOL...Or maybe his whole rant is just a ruse so he doesn't share his STASH.
[/QUOTE]sir GH has shared a lot of wonderful recordings. Look for the flac concert list.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]frank39 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"But I see absolutely no reason why they shouldn't be shared. Some people simply prefer MP3's, some prefer FLAC. MP3's are often more than sufficient - I don't really need to have the 5ive version of WWRY in FLAC or WAV or on original CD). "
You took the words right out of my mouth.
[/QUOTE]
I agree whole-heartedly!
You took the words right out of my mouth.
[/QUOTE]
I agree whole-heartedly!
Don't forget, many people own MP3 players and will therefore want MP3 format for them.
Also don't forget MP3s take up less space, so this also helps.
OKay MP3 players maybe less quality, but there are plenty of time where they are enough or more than.
It's like FM and AM radio as well as analogue TV compared to digital!
Also don't forget MP3s take up less space, so this also helps.
OKay MP3 players maybe less quality, but there are plenty of time where they are enough or more than.
It's like FM and AM radio as well as analogue TV compared to digital!
Sorry, I forgot to mention that obviously everyone knows flac is better than MP3 and digital TV and radio is better than analogue. No-one is saying any different.
HOWEVER we can still live with MP3s and analogue systems. So as long as we still have the systems which play them, we're still going to need things for them.
And if someone downloads a flac file, converts it to MP3 and deletes the flac version because they only want it in MP3 and then someone else wants it from them, what do they do? Accept the offer of MP3 or say "Sorry, MP3s are not good enough for me! You peasant!"
Get a grip folks!
HOWEVER we can still live with MP3s and analogue systems. So as long as we still have the systems which play them, we're still going to need things for them.
And if someone downloads a flac file, converts it to MP3 and deletes the flac version because they only want it in MP3 and then someone else wants it from them, what do they do? Accept the offer of MP3 or say "Sorry, MP3s are not good enough for me! You peasant!"
Get a grip folks!
It's been a year since this topic was started, and little has changed. We now have about a dozen people at this forum who are outspoken and pro-lossless. And since then, how many new Queen recordings have come to the light (not including those from Japanese bootleg companies)? One. Vancouver 78.
Honestly, why is it that at this forum there are still people who do not see why it's wrong to purposely ruin recordings? Is virtually every other trading community (thriving as they are) wrong? Check out how many new Floyd/Zep/Genesis/Rush recordings come out every year... it ain't because people share them in mp3 format. Collectors of those bands had this debate five years ago, and ousted anyone who disagreed - and look at how well they're doing. It doesn't take long to research how well this community is doing in comparison to others.
Are there many Zeppelin collectors here? Compare this place to the Presence server, and tell me which community has done their homework, and which one is enjoying more new recordings. If you think those hardcore tapers would share their uncirculated Zeppelin recordings at a pro-lossy forum, you must be out of your mind!
Many collectors are sitting on their Queen recordings purely because of the lack of quality standards here. I'm not talking about these selfish (mostly European) Queen collectors who hoard recordings like it's a sport. Most Queen collectors don't have a clue what goes on in the outside collecting world, and don't realize how bad our reputation is out there. I'm talking about neutral people (generally in the US) who recorded many bands including Queen. They happily share most of their stuff, but not their Queen recordings. They don't even talk about these recordings publicly, but good luck searching the forums if you want to hear about them.
There are 13 recordings from the US Game tour (most of which were available 10 years ago), and that was Queen's most successful (and longest) tour. Doesn't anyone here stop to wonder why? Do you think these new recordings just magically fall out of the sky? Sure, now and again we have wonderfully generous people like our new friend James who will soon share his Boston 76 recording (or so it seems, we hope!), but we have surely missed many opportunities for other new shows, purely because of the lack of quality standards here.
I'll continue to be a broken record about this until people here finally start to get it.
At the bare minimum, this is the way it should be:
1) Allow lossy and lossless sharing, and have separate forums for each.
2) Allow lossy recordings to be shared until the lossless version is shared. Then the lossy version should be removed. Those who still want it lossy can convert it themselves. The software is available for everyone, and it's very easy to use.
Honestly... who does NOT win if it's like this? In the spirit of preserving the quality of these recordings, someone please explain to me why this is wrong.
Honestly, why is it that at this forum there are still people who do not see why it's wrong to purposely ruin recordings? Is virtually every other trading community (thriving as they are) wrong? Check out how many new Floyd/Zep/Genesis/Rush recordings come out every year... it ain't because people share them in mp3 format. Collectors of those bands had this debate five years ago, and ousted anyone who disagreed - and look at how well they're doing. It doesn't take long to research how well this community is doing in comparison to others.
Are there many Zeppelin collectors here? Compare this place to the Presence server, and tell me which community has done their homework, and which one is enjoying more new recordings. If you think those hardcore tapers would share their uncirculated Zeppelin recordings at a pro-lossy forum, you must be out of your mind!
Many collectors are sitting on their Queen recordings purely because of the lack of quality standards here. I'm not talking about these selfish (mostly European) Queen collectors who hoard recordings like it's a sport. Most Queen collectors don't have a clue what goes on in the outside collecting world, and don't realize how bad our reputation is out there. I'm talking about neutral people (generally in the US) who recorded many bands including Queen. They happily share most of their stuff, but not their Queen recordings. They don't even talk about these recordings publicly, but good luck searching the forums if you want to hear about them.
There are 13 recordings from the US Game tour (most of which were available 10 years ago), and that was Queen's most successful (and longest) tour. Doesn't anyone here stop to wonder why? Do you think these new recordings just magically fall out of the sky? Sure, now and again we have wonderfully generous people like our new friend James who will soon share his Boston 76 recording (or so it seems, we hope!), but we have surely missed many opportunities for other new shows, purely because of the lack of quality standards here.
I'll continue to be a broken record about this until people here finally start to get it.
At the bare minimum, this is the way it should be:
1) Allow lossy and lossless sharing, and have separate forums for each.
2) Allow lossy recordings to be shared until the lossless version is shared. Then the lossy version should be removed. Those who still want it lossy can convert it themselves. The software is available for everyone, and it's very easy to use.
Honestly... who does NOT win if it's like this? In the spirit of preserving the quality of these recordings, someone please explain to me why this is wrong.
Hi,
I stumbled across this accidently, and when I read my own posting from 2006 (cited above), I was astonished, how much I have changed my mind since then.
In the meantime I have learned much about file sharing, bootlegs and trading communities. In my 2007 opinion, im with SirGH 100%. He is right, definitely, and if Queenzone doesn't change, it will degenerate into a playground of bored teenagers in the near future.
But how can a change be accomplished? How can standards be defined? They could be copied from other successful communities, but the forum will have to be observed. Through moderation? Who will spend his time on that? His money? I must admit, I could merely be a beneficiary, because I don't have either.
I stumbled across this accidently, and when I read my own posting from 2006 (cited above), I was astonished, how much I have changed my mind since then.
In the meantime I have learned much about file sharing, bootlegs and trading communities. In my 2007 opinion, im with SirGH 100%. He is right, definitely, and if Queenzone doesn't change, it will degenerate into a playground of bored teenagers in the near future.
But how can a change be accomplished? How can standards be defined? They could be copied from other successful communities, but the forum will have to be observed. Through moderation? Who will spend his time on that? His money? I must admit, I could merely be a beneficiary, because I don't have either.
Perhaps a few of us could be moderators of the sharing forums, and check each share to place it in the correct forum (lossy or lossless). I would be the first to volunteer, and would have no problem spending a half hour per day checking one song per torrent/rapidshare/whatever to see if it's lossless.
Anyone else?
Anyone else?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
There are 13 recordings from the US Game tour (most of which were available 10 years ago), and that was Queen's most successful (and longest) tour. Doesn't anyone here stop to wonder why? Do you think these new recordings just magically fall out of the sky?
[/QUOTE]
Now I'm waiting for someone to post the argument again that noone in the U.S. knew how to tape a concert and thus these shows were poorly documented. Ah yes...
There are 13 recordings from the US Game tour (most of which were available 10 years ago), and that was Queen's most successful (and longest) tour. Doesn't anyone here stop to wonder why? Do you think these new recordings just magically fall out of the sky?
[/QUOTE]
Now I'm waiting for someone to post the argument again that noone in the U.S. knew how to tape a concert and thus these shows were poorly documented. Ah yes...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Honestly, why is it that at this forum there are still people who do not see why it's wrong to purposely ruin recordings? Is virtually every other trading community (thriving as they are) wrong? Check out how many new Floyd/Zep/Genesis/Rush recordings come out every year... it ain't because people share them in mp3 format. Collectors of those bands had this debate five years ago, and ousted anyone who disagreed - and look at how well they're doing. It doesn't take long to research how well this community is doing in comparison to others.
[/QUOTE]
I doubt that Zep or Floyd collectors ever discussed if mp3 was the proper format to preserve unreleased live shows (don't know about Genesis or Rush though).
The "history" of these collecting scenes are just altogether different from the one of Queen. When the DAT format became popular in the early '90ies it was possible for the first time to losslessly copy shows and distribute them and thus the era of analog tape trading (i.e. cassettes and open reel) came to an end (not for Queen trading of course!)
Well, what Zep traders did at this stage was to seek out masters and low gens and transfer them to DAT, which now made it possible to distribute these upgrades without any quality loss down the line. So basically what the Zep scene (and many others) did 15 years ago, is what the Queen scene is slowly starting to do today.
Anyway, what does this have to do with mp3 sharing?
Well, when talking about the differences in the history of the Zep (for example) and Queen trading scenes I meant that it has always been the aim of Zep collectors to preserve these recordings in the best quality possible, because they understand that the recordings are unique and need to be treasured by the fans. They'd never ever discuss whether a lossy format might be the way to go, because it was more conveniant for some people. Mp3 is not lossless, therefore it's not acceptable. Period. They were finally able to make lossless copies of shows for the first time with DAT 15 years ago, so why would they start screwing up the sound of these recordings by using a poor lossy compression scheme today? Doesn't make sense to me.
Most Queen fans have an altogether different attitute towards these recordings. How often do you read postings here like "it's only an audience recording, so who cares what generation this is or what formats it went through, it's going to sound like shit anyway..." blah, blah, blah ?
That's what the real problem of the Queen scene is. Most fans just don't get that unreleased recordings need to be treasured and preserved by the fans, instead they regard them as worthless due to the inferior sound quality compared to an official release.
If this attitude changes we'll never have the mp3 vs. FLAC debate again.
Honestly, why is it that at this forum there are still people who do not see why it's wrong to purposely ruin recordings? Is virtually every other trading community (thriving as they are) wrong? Check out how many new Floyd/Zep/Genesis/Rush recordings come out every year... it ain't because people share them in mp3 format. Collectors of those bands had this debate five years ago, and ousted anyone who disagreed - and look at how well they're doing. It doesn't take long to research how well this community is doing in comparison to others.
[/QUOTE]
I doubt that Zep or Floyd collectors ever discussed if mp3 was the proper format to preserve unreleased live shows (don't know about Genesis or Rush though).
The "history" of these collecting scenes are just altogether different from the one of Queen. When the DAT format became popular in the early '90ies it was possible for the first time to losslessly copy shows and distribute them and thus the era of analog tape trading (i.e. cassettes and open reel) came to an end (not for Queen trading of course!)
Well, what Zep traders did at this stage was to seek out masters and low gens and transfer them to DAT, which now made it possible to distribute these upgrades without any quality loss down the line. So basically what the Zep scene (and many others) did 15 years ago, is what the Queen scene is slowly starting to do today.
Anyway, what does this have to do with mp3 sharing?
Well, when talking about the differences in the history of the Zep (for example) and Queen trading scenes I meant that it has always been the aim of Zep collectors to preserve these recordings in the best quality possible, because they understand that the recordings are unique and need to be treasured by the fans. They'd never ever discuss whether a lossy format might be the way to go, because it was more conveniant for some people. Mp3 is not lossless, therefore it's not acceptable. Period. They were finally able to make lossless copies of shows for the first time with DAT 15 years ago, so why would they start screwing up the sound of these recordings by using a poor lossy compression scheme today? Doesn't make sense to me.
Most Queen fans have an altogether different attitute towards these recordings. How often do you read postings here like "it's only an audience recording, so who cares what generation this is or what formats it went through, it's going to sound like shit anyway..." blah, blah, blah ?
That's what the real problem of the Queen scene is. Most fans just don't get that unreleased recordings need to be treasured and preserved by the fans, instead they regard them as worthless due to the inferior sound quality compared to an official release.
If this attitude changes we'll never have the mp3 vs. FLAC debate again.
Hello everyone out there,
I more than agree with Bob, this forum is having trouble and from a certain point of view we can see that two groups of people are here on Queenzone (talking about those who share, not those who only download, like me for the moment, sorry to say). We have on one hand the pro-MP3, and on the second hand the pro-FLAC. And reading the posts we can see them from each side of the line, beginning to insult each other, throw shoes (oops, sorry, glimpse from South America maybe...) at each others and for a second we are in front of a civil war ! HERE, on Queenzone !!! OK, I'm exagerating things. But do I, really ?
This is the same topic going on for years, and IF we can trust Bob (and I'm sure we do !!), outside Queenzone, in other music fans forums, the lossy formats are excluded since a good pack of years ! Could they all be wrong, and here the pro-MP3 would be right ? I don't think so, and if we try to understand why it is like that, then it's easy to conclude the only thing possible : sharing MP3 is good for those who want MP3, and there are still a lot of people in that case (sad, but let's understand then and agree with them), but can refrain those who only think about FLAC and other lossless formats, whatever they are ! What's the interest of buying a superb hi-fi system, with all the best technology on it, and then beginning to downgrade it, and invite friends to see and hear it, or wrap it and offer to one of your best friends in that state ? Quite a non-sense. That's the same with MP3 I think. We can very well deteriorate the sound if we are forced to do it to hear the files, or to play them on a MP3-player, OK, if there's no other way then let's go, that's perfect. But we can't honestly continue to offer them (or sell them !!) to other Queen fans if a lossless version exists !! that's not that way the other Queen fans could enjoy the quality of the music and let the concerts still be easily available in the next 20 years to come !!
So I see three options :
1- "Play the Game" : Making a database of the MP3 recordings and a link to each concert (quite a work)
2- "Divorce" : Creating a new forum that would only be for lossless sharing (quite radical solution, and why not saying Queenzone's dead right now !)
3- "Living Together" : Not quite a "Divorce" solution, but a sort of respecting each other's point of view and let everyone find its pleasure on Queenzone, going on the forum he prefers, the one for lossy and the one for lossless, each one in its room !
The perfect solution in my own point of view is the third. I will go on lossy sharing format if I want to, and I will go on lossless if I prefer. In my case, I do, but in anyone's case there is no problem of banning someone from Queenzone, just have a separation. I'm pretty sure the two groups of Queenzoners would benefit quite from it, and that could not be a problem. I don't argue with my neighbour if he doesn't listen the same music than me, I'm only arguing with him if he plays it too loud. So stop fighting men, we are all fed up and we all prefer going on Queenzone to read what we prefer : music, Queen music, kindly, and that's all...
OK so now take your phone, call the 00/984/74/65/35/885 (or whatever number you prefer), then press 1 for the first solution being finalist, 2 for the second, and 3 for the third !!!
I think Bob started a very good reflexion, and I don't understand why it would not be possible to do this way.
Let's hope you would like to share your own point of view, and if we can propose something new on Queenzone to please everyone.
Olivier,
France.
I more than agree with Bob, this forum is having trouble and from a certain point of view we can see that two groups of people are here on Queenzone (talking about those who share, not those who only download, like me for the moment, sorry to say). We have on one hand the pro-MP3, and on the second hand the pro-FLAC. And reading the posts we can see them from each side of the line, beginning to insult each other, throw shoes (oops, sorry, glimpse from South America maybe...) at each others and for a second we are in front of a civil war ! HERE, on Queenzone !!! OK, I'm exagerating things. But do I, really ?
This is the same topic going on for years, and IF we can trust Bob (and I'm sure we do !!), outside Queenzone, in other music fans forums, the lossy formats are excluded since a good pack of years ! Could they all be wrong, and here the pro-MP3 would be right ? I don't think so, and if we try to understand why it is like that, then it's easy to conclude the only thing possible : sharing MP3 is good for those who want MP3, and there are still a lot of people in that case (sad, but let's understand then and agree with them), but can refrain those who only think about FLAC and other lossless formats, whatever they are ! What's the interest of buying a superb hi-fi system, with all the best technology on it, and then beginning to downgrade it, and invite friends to see and hear it, or wrap it and offer to one of your best friends in that state ? Quite a non-sense. That's the same with MP3 I think. We can very well deteriorate the sound if we are forced to do it to hear the files, or to play them on a MP3-player, OK, if there's no other way then let's go, that's perfect. But we can't honestly continue to offer them (or sell them !!) to other Queen fans if a lossless version exists !! that's not that way the other Queen fans could enjoy the quality of the music and let the concerts still be easily available in the next 20 years to come !!
So I see three options :
1- "Play the Game" : Making a database of the MP3 recordings and a link to each concert (quite a work)
2- "Divorce" : Creating a new forum that would only be for lossless sharing (quite radical solution, and why not saying Queenzone's dead right now !)
3- "Living Together" : Not quite a "Divorce" solution, but a sort of respecting each other's point of view and let everyone find its pleasure on Queenzone, going on the forum he prefers, the one for lossy and the one for lossless, each one in its room !
The perfect solution in my own point of view is the third. I will go on lossy sharing format if I want to, and I will go on lossless if I prefer. In my case, I do, but in anyone's case there is no problem of banning someone from Queenzone, just have a separation. I'm pretty sure the two groups of Queenzoners would benefit quite from it, and that could not be a problem. I don't argue with my neighbour if he doesn't listen the same music than me, I'm only arguing with him if he plays it too loud. So stop fighting men, we are all fed up and we all prefer going on Queenzone to read what we prefer : music, Queen music, kindly, and that's all...
OK so now take your phone, call the 00/984/74/65/35/885 (or whatever number you prefer), then press 1 for the first solution being finalist, 2 for the second, and 3 for the third !!!
I think Bob started a very good reflexion, and I don't understand why it would not be possible to do this way.
Let's hope you would like to share your own point of view, and if we can propose something new on Queenzone to please everyone.
Olivier,
France.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]tilomagnet wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Well, what Zep traders did at this stage was to seek out masters and low gens and transfer them to DAT, which now made it possible to distribute these upgrades without any quality loss down the line. So basically what the Zep scene (and many others) did 15 years ago, is what the Queen scene is slowly starting to do today.
Anyway, what does this have to do with mp3 sharing?
[/QUOTE]
Mp3 destroys the process of preserving low generation tapes. You of all people know that.. :)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]ruth.olivier wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Let's hope you would like to share your own point of view, and if we can propose something new on Queenzone to please everyone.[/QUOTE]
But that's the thing... we're not going to please everyone. It's time to be blunt:
We need to weed out those who are pro-mp3. They contribute nothing to the community. It really is as simple as that.
There's another challenge... tell me, what can pro-lossy people contribute to the community that pro-lossless people cannot?
Anyway, what does this have to do with mp3 sharing?
[/QUOTE]
Mp3 destroys the process of preserving low generation tapes. You of all people know that.. :)
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]ruth.olivier wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Let's hope you would like to share your own point of view, and if we can propose something new on Queenzone to please everyone.[/QUOTE]
But that's the thing... we're not going to please everyone. It's time to be blunt:
We need to weed out those who are pro-mp3. They contribute nothing to the community. It really is as simple as that.
There's another challenge... tell me, what can pro-lossy people contribute to the community that pro-lossless people cannot?
Frankly, if what Sir GH is saying is true (and I have full confidence that it is), simply splitting into a lossless forum and a lossy forum isn't enough.
Think of it this way: the people hoarding Queen recordings because the Queen community has a nasty tendency towards lossy wouldn't see their concerns answered simply because lossless has its own forum now. All that means is that someone needs to download the FLACs, make crappy-sounding 128kbps MP3s of them, and share them in the lossy forum. It's a rubber stamp measure that benefits no one, because those new recordings remain hidden. If anything, it sets us back because QZ would be putting a stamp of approval on lossy sharing instead of simply tolerating it, as is the case now.
Personally, I want to hear some new recordings. I download the FLACs and convert them to MP3 for personal use, because 320kbps is acceptable to my ears. I then make sure that my converted MP3s are not shared, period, because that would be peeing in someone else's pool.
To answer the question posed about what to do if someone hears your MP3 and wants the show after you've deleted your FLACs, why not direct them to the thread where you got the FLACs from and let them discover it for themselves? If they don't want to go through the three minutes it would take to find the thread and start the download, hey, too bad for them. Best case, though, they find their show--along with several others they like. Bam, new fan to keep the music alive.
I'm not entirely altruistic in this pursuit, though. While I was at the Phoenix, AZ, show in March of last year, I saw at least three people on the floor recording. I've been chasing down tape of that show since the day afterwards (a day that I should have spent racing to San Diego to see them again, but that's beside the point), and among the very little I've turned up is that at least one person at that show apparently did get a good quality, complete recording of it, and they distributed it among a handful of friends with specific instruction that it was not to reach the internet until the taper gave the ok, nor was it to be traded.
I can't really go any farther into that conversation than to say that certain things were said which confirm to my satisfaction that the person I spoke with is not full of it, and there genuinely is a recording of Phoenix out there with instructions that it is not to be traded or shared. I also have very good reason to believe that there's a reason this taper specified to the people who got this recording that it was not to reach the internet--a request the person I exchanged e-mails with said this guy had never made of bootlegs taped for his friends before.
I know it's only a recent Q+PR show, and not a '70s gem, but my point is that the '70s gems are out there, as are the early '80s shows we've "lost" to the ages. The taper of the Phoenix show is hoarding it because of the Queen fanbase's reputation for destroying bootlegs by making them into MP3s and distributing those lossy files (that's what I believe, anyway). If someone who's taped a grand total of one Queen show knows enough about the QZ leeches to specify no trading, how much is being held back by those who taped several shows back in the golden years?
The answer: we'll never know until QZ bans lossy sharing. Period.
Think of it this way: the people hoarding Queen recordings because the Queen community has a nasty tendency towards lossy wouldn't see their concerns answered simply because lossless has its own forum now. All that means is that someone needs to download the FLACs, make crappy-sounding 128kbps MP3s of them, and share them in the lossy forum. It's a rubber stamp measure that benefits no one, because those new recordings remain hidden. If anything, it sets us back because QZ would be putting a stamp of approval on lossy sharing instead of simply tolerating it, as is the case now.
Personally, I want to hear some new recordings. I download the FLACs and convert them to MP3 for personal use, because 320kbps is acceptable to my ears. I then make sure that my converted MP3s are not shared, period, because that would be peeing in someone else's pool.
To answer the question posed about what to do if someone hears your MP3 and wants the show after you've deleted your FLACs, why not direct them to the thread where you got the FLACs from and let them discover it for themselves? If they don't want to go through the three minutes it would take to find the thread and start the download, hey, too bad for them. Best case, though, they find their show--along with several others they like. Bam, new fan to keep the music alive.
I'm not entirely altruistic in this pursuit, though. While I was at the Phoenix, AZ, show in March of last year, I saw at least three people on the floor recording. I've been chasing down tape of that show since the day afterwards (a day that I should have spent racing to San Diego to see them again, but that's beside the point), and among the very little I've turned up is that at least one person at that show apparently did get a good quality, complete recording of it, and they distributed it among a handful of friends with specific instruction that it was not to reach the internet until the taper gave the ok, nor was it to be traded.
I can't really go any farther into that conversation than to say that certain things were said which confirm to my satisfaction that the person I spoke with is not full of it, and there genuinely is a recording of Phoenix out there with instructions that it is not to be traded or shared. I also have very good reason to believe that there's a reason this taper specified to the people who got this recording that it was not to reach the internet--a request the person I exchanged e-mails with said this guy had never made of bootlegs taped for his friends before.
I know it's only a recent Q+PR show, and not a '70s gem, but my point is that the '70s gems are out there, as are the early '80s shows we've "lost" to the ages. The taper of the Phoenix show is hoarding it because of the Queen fanbase's reputation for destroying bootlegs by making them into MP3s and distributing those lossy files (that's what I believe, anyway). If someone who's taped a grand total of one Queen show knows enough about the QZ leeches to specify no trading, how much is being held back by those who taped several shows back in the golden years?
The answer: we'll never know until QZ bans lossy sharing. Period.
Here is a reply from a person who loved mp3s a few years ago - I started with Queen bootlegs in the time I've joined the Queen hub. In that time I was downloading ONLY mp3s, because they were so small and my connection was so slow. Even when I downloaded flac, I have converted them to mp3s and deleted the flac files to save disc space ! In simple words, I was once exactly such an idiot, like many Queenzone users now.
There are 3 main problems with mp3s
1) They are lossy. You lose audio information everytime you make some changes to the mp3 files.
2) They have irremovable "gaps" at the end, which is completely wrong for concerts.
3) No "real" trader accepts mp3s these days, so my huge mp3 collection is worthless.
But now I have a much bigger hard disk and a bigger download speed, so I started to download and trade lossless concerts, and since I've listened to my first lossless recording I've NEVER came back to mp3s.
I thought that people will be the same as I am, so I thought let them download what they want, but it looks like some people still don't want to understand that mp3s should be not shared.
I fully support SirGH with the idea of splitting the "Sharing the Music - Announce" forum into lossy and lossless sections and to make it moderated. MP3s deserve to die
There are 3 main problems with mp3s
1) They are lossy. You lose audio information everytime you make some changes to the mp3 files.
2) They have irremovable "gaps" at the end, which is completely wrong for concerts.
3) No "real" trader accepts mp3s these days, so my huge mp3 collection is worthless.
But now I have a much bigger hard disk and a bigger download speed, so I started to download and trade lossless concerts, and since I've listened to my first lossless recording I've NEVER came back to mp3s.
I thought that people will be the same as I am, so I thought let them download what they want, but it looks like some people still don't want to understand that mp3s should be not shared.
I fully support SirGH with the idea of splitting the "Sharing the Music - Announce" forum into lossy and lossless sections and to make it moderated. MP3s deserve to die
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Thunderbolt<br><h6>Courtesy of God wrote: [/QUOTENAME]All that means is that someone needs to download the FLACs, make crappy-sounding 128kbps MP3s of them, and share them in the lossy forum. It's a rubber stamp measure that benefits no one, because those new recordings remain hidden. If anything, it sets us back because QZ would be putting a stamp of approval on lossy sharing instead of simply tolerating it, as is the case now.[/QUOTE]
That's a fantastic point.
That's a fantastic point.
I do agree with you Bob, MP" is not hat good for new recordings to be shared, that's totally true.
I still think we have to make some place for MP3 users. The best place we would have to make would be to share flac files, then they can convert the files themselves. But it seems that can take too much time for people here or something, because I don't know why MP3 are still shared when flac files do exist. That's something I can't uderstand, but well, that's as it is !
So, given the situation, do we have to ban 50% of the Queenzoners here and only keep the other ones ? It seems a little radical, I think you understand my point of view. We have to be more strict regarding to MP3, but is banning it a real solution ? It clearly would be the best one, I agree with you, but I think we have to be realistic, it's a shame but we can't tell everybody to get out of Queenzone like that ! On the other hand, they don't do anything better for the forum, that's true, I agree too.
So what we can do ? maybe create a queenzonemp3.com sort of thing, a parallel website which would not be the same, where people could find MP3. Well, if we have queenzone.com offering flac files besides, I'm quite sure this site would not be visited so often, unless for people wanting to discover Queen live and prefering listening and downloading mp3s in the first time. There are some, you can't disagree with me. I was one of these in the first time, I didn't know anything about flac until one year or two ago, so I was pleased with MP3 files somebody sent to me, that permitted me to hear what they sung, said, audience things and so on. But I am upset when I see that the same gigs exist in flac format, far better quality.
Do you think a sort of Queenzonemp3.com or another website for MP3 sharing would be a good solution ? It would leave MP3 lovers outside Queenzone, where only flac would be shared (but remember Queenzone is not only a place for sharing, it also has a lot of info and so on).
I don't think we could create a Queenzoneflac.com, we have to keep the good quality and the name of Queenzone together I think.
Well, if we can't live together on Queenzone, would you think this would be an acceptable solution ?
Thanks for your opinion. Yes, we can share that too, no need to know if it is lossy or lossless opinion, or if it shared via torrent or mediafire !! Think about it ;o)
Olivier,
France.
I still think we have to make some place for MP3 users. The best place we would have to make would be to share flac files, then they can convert the files themselves. But it seems that can take too much time for people here or something, because I don't know why MP3 are still shared when flac files do exist. That's something I can't uderstand, but well, that's as it is !
So, given the situation, do we have to ban 50% of the Queenzoners here and only keep the other ones ? It seems a little radical, I think you understand my point of view. We have to be more strict regarding to MP3, but is banning it a real solution ? It clearly would be the best one, I agree with you, but I think we have to be realistic, it's a shame but we can't tell everybody to get out of Queenzone like that ! On the other hand, they don't do anything better for the forum, that's true, I agree too.
So what we can do ? maybe create a queenzonemp3.com sort of thing, a parallel website which would not be the same, where people could find MP3. Well, if we have queenzone.com offering flac files besides, I'm quite sure this site would not be visited so often, unless for people wanting to discover Queen live and prefering listening and downloading mp3s in the first time. There are some, you can't disagree with me. I was one of these in the first time, I didn't know anything about flac until one year or two ago, so I was pleased with MP3 files somebody sent to me, that permitted me to hear what they sung, said, audience things and so on. But I am upset when I see that the same gigs exist in flac format, far better quality.
Do you think a sort of Queenzonemp3.com or another website for MP3 sharing would be a good solution ? It would leave MP3 lovers outside Queenzone, where only flac would be shared (but remember Queenzone is not only a place for sharing, it also has a lot of info and so on).
I don't think we could create a Queenzoneflac.com, we have to keep the good quality and the name of Queenzone together I think.
Well, if we can't live together on Queenzone, would you think this would be an acceptable solution ?
Thanks for your opinion. Yes, we can share that too, no need to know if it is lossy or lossless opinion, or if it shared via torrent or mediafire !! Think about it ;o)
Olivier,
France.