| Home | Register | FAQ | Members List | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
|
#1 (permalink) | |
|
volkswagen yellow & gold
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: london, england.
Posts: 6,215
|
itunes
i like this. Quote:
Last edited by cam : 28-02-2006 at 04:10. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) | |
|
i'm done, son
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,262
|
Fucking. A. Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) | |
|
hmmm...
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Yorkuk
Posts: 2,130
|
I agree with this guy's response: Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
#11 (permalink) | |
|
i'm done, son
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,262
|
Quote:
I don't know that that's true, but I just said - why should I pay for something that's essentially the same price as a song on a higher quality CD and already in a lossy format and re-compress it into another lossy format when I could just go one step - CD to variable bitrate MP3? Sigh, fanboys. |
|
|
|
|
#13 (permalink) |
|
Sir digby chicken caesar
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,306
|
The basic laws of compression make it obvious that ripping a lossy mp3 to a CD, and then ripping it back isn't going to magically make that mp3 higher quality... if anything you will lose more of the original recording in the process as the software distorts the original levels. Bloody feckless i-tunes users. |
|
![]() |