From: owner-faxlist-digest@2350.org (faxlist-digest) To: faxlist-digest@monkey.org Subject: faxlist-digest V2003 #61 Reply-To: faxlist@2350.org Sender: owner-faxlist-digest@2350.org Errors-To: owner-faxlist-digest@2350.org Precedence: bulk faxlist-digest Friday, April 4 2003 Volume 2003 : Number 061 Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? (fax) mp3's on cd ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 18:36:44 -0700 From: "Graham Banting" Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Isn't that what people said about CDs in the mid 1980's? graham > I don't know why, maybe I'm just a luddite, but I > don't want have anything to do with 'em. I want > something I can play in my Discman, or a regular ole > jambox, or my CD player by the bed. Maybe I'm ust > getting old and can't keep up with all these formats: > DVD Audio, Super Audio, MP3... > > John W. > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 20:52:36 -0500 From: "Stephen Philips" Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? > > I don't know why, maybe I'm just a luddite, but I > > don't want have anything to do with 'em. I want > > something I can play in my Discman, or a regular ole > > jambox, or my CD player by the bed. Maybe I'm ust > > getting old and can't keep up with all these formats: > > DVD Audio, Super Audio, MP3... I think the concept is good, I just think the execution is bad. I think it would be more interesting if they encoded the mp3s at 256k or 320k and if there was some previously unreleased stuff on there. That would make them much more appealing to me. If I own all the 2350 Broadway discs, why would I bother buying a 192k mp3 disc if I could encode them myself at 320k? On the other hand, if you're new to Fax and have none of the older stuff, the chance to get some of this sold out stuff is good, I just think the 192k mp3s are bad. I mean you can download 128k mp3s for a lot cheaper at Emusic. And frankly, 128k mp3s sound bad, and 192k are better but not as good as CDs. Stephen Philips Dark Duck Records e | music@darkduck.net web | http://www.darkduck.net Drone Download Project: http://www.darkduck.net/drone.htm ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 21:39:18 -0500 From: "Mike Carss" Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Erm... Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure that the lowest bitrate used on the MP3 CDs is 256k. Another thing to keep in mind is that they're probably for those of us who don't own the original CDs and only have the emusic versions. And since in most cases, you can't buy the originals anymore, it's nice to have the compilation on one CD at a decent bitrate. - -Mike - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Philips" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 8:52 PM Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? > I think the concept is good, I just think the > execution is bad. I think it would be more > interesting if they encoded the mp3s at 256k or > 320k and if there was some previously unreleased > stuff on there. That would make them much more > appealing to me. If I own all the 2350 Broadway > discs, why would I bother buying a 192k mp3 disc > if I could encode them myself at 320k? > > On the other hand, if you're new to Fax and have > none of the older stuff, the chance to get some of > this sold out stuff is good, I just think the 192k > mp3s are bad. I mean you can download 128k mp3s > for a lot cheaper at Emusic. And frankly, 128k > mp3s sound bad, and 192k are better but not as > good as CDs. > > > Stephen Philips > Dark Duck Records > e | music@darkduck.net > web | http://www.darkduck.net > Drone Download Project: > http://www.darkduck.net/drone.htm ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 01:12:20 -0500 From: "jackthetab" Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? wow...what a wonderful upgrade. kunst und wahnsinn, jackthetab #####\ _ /##### #( )# | _( )__ | #( )# ##### | /_woof/ | ##### #" "# | ___m/I_ /_____ | #" "# # O # |____#-x.\ /++m\ /.x-#____| # O # #m.m# | /" \ ///###\\\ / "\ | #m.m# #####/ ######/ \###### \##### /_______________________________________\ - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Carss" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 9:39 PM Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? > Erm... Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure that the lowest > bitrate used on the MP3 CDs is 256k. > Another thing to keep in mind is that they're probably for those of us who > don't own the original CDs and only have the emusic versions. > And since in most cases, you can't buy the originals anymore, it's nice to > have the compilation on one CD at a decent bitrate. > > -Mike ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 09:30:20 +0100 From: Paul Milligan Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? John Take heart ... there are at least two of us! > I want something I can play in my Discman, or a regular > ole jambox, or my CD player by the bed. Maybe I'm ust > getting old Maybe you (we) are, but it's not a ****ing crime. Ban the bitrate bores I say. Regards Ol' Long-in-the-tooth "Stand up, stand up, for Jesus ....." ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 07:08:33 -0500 From: "Mike Carss" Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? *shrugs* No need to be sarcastic. Some of us just like FAX for the music... not just for collecting. If that means I have some FAX music on MP3 as opposed to an audio CD, and as long as it sounds fine... it's all good. You make it seem like an MP3 @ 256k sounds like 128k or worse. Come on, you know it's not THAT bad. ;) - -Mike - ----- Original Message ----- From: "jackthetab" To: Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 1:12 AM Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? > wow...what a wonderful upgrade. > > kunst und wahnsinn, > jackthetab > > #####\ _ /##### > #( )# | _( )__ | #( )# > ##### | /_woof/ | ##### > #" "# | ___m/I_ /_____ | #" "# > # O # |____#-x.\ /++m\ /.x-#____| # O # > #m.m# | /" \ ///###\\\ / "\ | #m.m# > #####/ ######/ \###### \##### > /_______________________________________\ > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Carss" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 9:39 PM > Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 > CDs? > > > > Erm... Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure that the lowest > > bitrate used on the MP3 CDs is 256k. > > Another thing to keep in mind is that they're probably for those of us who > > don't own the original CDs and only have the emusic versions. > > And since in most cases, you can't buy the originals anymore, it's nice to > > have the compilation on one CD at a decent bitrate. > > > > -Mike ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 05:43:51 -0800 (PST) From: John Whitney Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? I guess I can maybe understand the attraction of the MP3 releases if you don't already have most of what's been put out on CD from previous years. But even though you supposedly can't hear the difference (no matter what 'high' bit rates you're talking), my mind still says: 'This is a crunchy little MP3 when it comes right down to it.' I think I'm a just biased about the whole thing, because to me the ultimate sound reproduction comes from a nice clean slab of vinyl and a good stylus. In my mind, I can experience the low-end much better that way. Right or wrong, technically speaking, I feel like MP3s and even many poorly mastered CDs have too much high-end and especially cymbals can have the potential to sound really shitty. I must admit, I own a disturbing quantity of CDs; it's just hard to get a lot of recordings in any other format. So it's probably all in my mind. I'm not saying one's right or wrong. Thanks for the comments though. Nice to know I'm not the only one who isn't too crazy about MP3s! :) John W. http://johnwhitneymusic.tripod.com/ __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more http://tax.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 09:33:38 -0500 (EST) From: "Stephen Philips" Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? John Whitney wrote: > I guess I can maybe understand the attraction of the > MP3 releases if you don't already have most of what's > been put out on CD from previous years. But even > though you supposedly can't hear the difference (no > matter what 'high' bit rates you're talking), my mind > still says: 'This is a crunchy little MP3 when it > comes right down to it.' I guess my real feeling is if FAX wants to reissue this stuff, why not just reissue it as regular CDs and maybe help stop the scourge on EBAY. I mean, they've done the mp3 thing with Emusic, why issue CDs with mp3s? Stephen Philips Dark Duck Records e | music@darkduck.net web | http://www.darkduck.net Drone Download Project: http://www.darkduck.net/drone.htm New guitar-based sub-label Dissonance Records http://www.dissonancerecords.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2003 17:56:33 +0100 From: Paul Milligan Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? > they've done the mp3 thing with Emusic, why issue CDs with mp3s? gimmick? ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 12:59:07 -0500 (EST) From: "Stephen Philips" Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? Paul Milligan wrote: > > >> they've done the mp3 thing with Emusic, why issue CDs with mp3s? > > gimmick? I think you are right, or why would they be using this tagline >-10 Years of Silence- the first Ambient/Chill-Out MP3 CD worldwide ! Congradulations! FAX won. They get the wilkey button. They were the first to issue a chill-out mp3 CD, and world-wide too. Stephen Philips Dark Duck Records e | music@darkduck.net web | http://www.darkduck.net Drone Download Project: http://www.darkduck.net/drone.htm New guitar-based sub-label Dissonance Records http://www.dissonancerecords.net ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 13:28:12 -0500 From: "jackthetab" Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? >>>I think I'm a just biased about the whole thing, because to me the ultimate sound reproduction comes from a nice clean slab of vinyl>>> You are not biased. Vinyl has better sounds than a cd or other mediums. I prefer vinyl myself, but it is not easy to find all the good stuff on vinyl :-( Anyways, I had an article which supported the fact that vinyl had better sounds reproduction than a cd. I will have to dig that up for specfics. kunst und wahnsinn, jackthetab #####\ _ /##### #( )# | _( )__ | #( )# ##### | /_woof/ | ##### #" "# | ___m/I_ /_____ | #" "# # O # |____#-x.\ /++m\ /.x-#____| # O # #m.m# | /" \ ///###\\\ / "\ | #m.m# #####/ ######/ \###### \##### /_______________________________________\ ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 13:29:50 -0500 (EST) From: Warren Lapham Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? On Thu, 3 Apr 2003, Stephen Philips wrote: > Paul Milligan wrote: > >> they've done the mp3 thing with Emusic, why issue CDs with mp3s? > > > > gimmick? > > > I think you are right, or why would they be using this tagline > > >-10 Years of Silence- the first Ambient/Chill-Out MP3 CD worldwide ! > > Congradulations! FAX won. They get the wilkey button. They were the > first to issue a chill-out mp3 CD, and world-wide too. then why have they issued another, and have a third coming soon? in response to some of the other questions/complaints people have had, here's _my_ (i.e., unofficial) take: q: why is fax releasing them as mp3s again when they've already been released on eMusic? a: well, as any longtime reader of the list would know, there are problems with the eMusic mp3s. they are encoded quite poorly -- not only at a low bitrate, but also, it seems, using a poor algorithm. also, all of the "multipart" songs are broken up into separate tracks, as they were broken up on the CD -- which ruins the flow of tracks during playback. q: why is fax bothering to release mp3s when they sound inferior to CDs? a: that these particular mp3s sound inferior to CDs is an opinion, not a fact. generally speaking, ambient music is perfectly suited for the mp3 format. it's usually not very dynamic, and oftentimes the sounds most noticeably affected by the mp3 compression (cymbals and hihats) are not present in ambient recordings. imo, some of the tracks on 2350 broadway are perfectly suited for this. antecdotal evidence suggests to me that mp3s encoded at a very high bitrate (as the FAX mp3 CD tracks are) are almost always indistinguishable from CDs in blind listening tests. q: why doesn't fax just re-release the albums on audio CDs instead of mp3 CDs? a: several reasons, probably. to be the first to have done it, of course, but also because one CD is cheaper to produce (and more likely to sell out) instead of five or three or whatever. artistically speaking, i imagine that it is also satisfying for namlook to release them all on one disc so they can all be played back-to-back, without interruption. q: you can't listen to mp3 CDs anywhere outside of your computer. a: nonsense. many DVD players and portable CD players are now capable of playing mp3 CDs. i've had one of each for several years, and they were no more expensive than comparable models that did not offer this feature. so you're not going to go out and buy one just for these reissues? fine. i wouldn't, either. but someday you will be faced with the opportunity, however. will there be clamoring for a reissue of these mp3 CDs down the road, long after they've sold out? of course. this is FAX we're talking about, after all. q: why does't namlook reissue these titles as some variant on the DVD format, perhaps even DVD-Audio? the format sounds better than CD, let alone mp3. a: first, even though the format is capable of sounding better than CD, in practice, it wouldn't sound any better unless the original analog tapes are remastered at the higher sample rate and/or bit width. as for the newer recordings, they are most likely recorded digitally, and will never sound better than the level of quality at which they were recorded. second, i'd wager that there are more people capable of listening to mp3 releases than there are who are capable of listening to DVD releases, especially DVD audio. the format hasn't caught on yet. q: why doesn't namlook put unreleased material on these mp3 CDs? a: he claims that there is no unreleased material worthy of release. (remember the cookbook 2 discussions?) whether that's true or not, adding additional material to the CDs would neccessitate the lowering of the bitrate on the other material -- giving more fuel to the criticisms about the inferior audio quality of the releases. q: why am i complaining about releases that don't interest me and probably took no more than two days apiece to put together? a: i have no idea. - -w. - -- http://www.warlap.net/ (now with music blog) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 10:55:55 -0800 From: David Jones Subject: Re: (fax) Who else out there isn't into the whole idea of Fax MP3 CDs? On Thursday, Apr 3, 2003, at 08:56 US/Pacific, Paul Milligan wrote: >> they've done the mp3 thing with Emusic, why issue CDs with mp3s? > > gimmick? Maybe cost savings for everyone involved? Think about it. This is the case for Silence: - - 5 CDs worth of OOP music for less than the price of 2 AW releases - - CD-ROM's are cheaper to get duplicated - - One single jewel case vs. 5 - - Pete prints 500 of these single discs to handle the demand of people that didn't pick up the originals vs. say 1000 for each of the 5 AW releases. - - If someone really wants to play them in a regular CD-audio player, you can always burn your own All in all, for someone that doesn't have the originals, this is a very good deal. And for Pete, an AW rerelease would be at least 10 times more expensive. I personally own all of the original discs being reissued, so I won't be getting these, but that's ok as I'm not a completist by any stretch of the imagination. Not every fax release is for every fan after all... And anyone that still complains about the quality of 256-320K mp3 vs. the original CD is probably just being a whanker. The original Silence releases weren't recorded that well to begin with, so an mp3 isn't going to do anything to harm them. That's my take anyway... David np: Create (burned as a single 320K VBR mp3 - played back via iTunes 3 on a pair of Sennheiser 570s - sounds great to me...) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2003 09:32:27 +0100 From: Paul Milligan Subject: (fax) mp3's on cd the things that occurred to me right at the outset (before all the technical / bitrate bores got onboard) was how often do people have time to sit down and listen to 5hrs of continuous music and how many people would be interested in buying all 5 releases on one disc if they already own at least some of them. Personally speaking, this is why I'm not interested, but then I'm quite prepared to accept I'm odd. Paul. PS. I thought Warren's arguments were extremely well put but, I still perceive the exercise as a gimmick. ------------------------------ End of faxlist-digest V2003 #61 ******************************* --- + To post: ; to mail a person: + To unsubscribe: "unsubscribe" to + Online info at: www.faxlabel.com www.hyperreal.org/fax www.2350.org