Dubstepforum.com

123kidd wrote:Thanks for the responses guys. Gonna go crawl into a hole and die now

Yeah man, better not catch you listening to youtube again. Hope you've learned your lesson.

dididub wrote:

outbound wrote:

123kidd wrote:Thats explains it. Yes these reference tracks are off youtube. Does the high frequency get cut off because of mp3 conversion, or just merely youtube quality?

It's down to simple data compression, to get a file size smaller you have to lose information somewhere. Not having to represent the higher frequencies means it takes up less room, loads quicker etc. This can either be a result of how data is compressed when it is uploaded to youtube or if the MP3 was severely compressed before.

Always so helpful

But some people deserve some stick

"these reference tracks are off youtube"

^^^Sentence of the year^^^^

I'm no judge I'm just an audio junkie that wants to talk sonic fidelity

outbound wrote:

dididub wrote:

outbound wrote:

123kidd wrote:Thats explains it. Yes these reference tracks are off youtube. Does the high frequency get cut off because of mp3 conversion, or just merely youtube quality?

It's down to simple data compression, to get a file size smaller you have to lose information somewhere. Not having to represent the higher frequencies means it takes up less room, loads quicker etc. This can either be a result of how data is compressed when it is uploaded to youtube or if the MP3 was severely compressed before.

Always so helpful

But some people deserve some stick

"these reference tracks are off youtube"

^^^Sentence of the year^^^^

I'm no judge I'm just an audio junkie that wants to talk sonic fidelity

Or in this case lack of!

subfect wrote:

Today wrote:in that case its just an instance of being a dummy. rip your vinyl to digital if you want to reference the track. Or stop looking at tunes through spectrum analyzers.. as if that's going to help you do anything

I really hope this is sarcasm

not the slightest bit. u actually think that shit is worth your time? mix with ears, not eyes.

Today wrote:

subfect wrote:

Today wrote:in that case its just an instance of being a dummy. rip your vinyl to digital if you want to reference the track. Or stop looking at tunes through spectrum analyzers.. as if that's going to help you do anything

I really hope this is sarcasm

not the slightest bit. u actually think that shit is worth your time? mix with ears, not eyes.

True, hearing is vital in mixdowns, but this logic is more applicable to seasoned mix engineers and artists who already understand acoustics and everything that encompasses. In this context, a spectrum analyzer is extremely beneficial, especially for a student who lacks a proper frame of reference such as a monitoring or high fidelity system. Even if you're forced to mix on laptop speakers or cheap ear buds, being able to sweep a filter across a reference track plus a spectrum analyzer can teach you a lot about the qualities of the sound.

that was the most fair and polite response ever provided on the internet ever, i think
nice one

atticuh wrote:

123kidd wrote:Thats explains it. Yes these reference tracks are off youtube. Does the high frequency get cut off because of mp3 conversion, or just merely youtube quality?

No offense to the OP, because I was once a noob too, but usually publicly admitting that you steal what most people on these forums are trying to sell is literally asking to be viciously attacked. One day when you are no longer a noob, you will look back on what you said and laugh with the rest of us, but until that day comes, the community usually will never live this down.

People still try to sell music for profit? Are we in the right decade?

people's tunes are still their assets, and more importantly their IP. Ripping off YT or whatever is fucked up i don't even care what rationale people have for pirating and i know we already have a thread for it but ----

if we don't collectively decide to start buying music again and making it profitable, no one is going to bother producing valuable music. It will turn into nothing but a huge soundcloud circlejerk of competing egos, and regular fans will be left in the dust, reminiscing of the days when they were offered songs half as good as the ones brosteppers are still "remixing"

I disagree, I think the now non existent profit margin from sales has left the people who actually love production in a better position. Selling music to consumers is just a poor business practice in today's industry, and I know for damn sure the quality of my music hasn't suffered because I won't see a profit. The vast majority of us produce for free in our own studios, making money from sales is irrelevant, but this is going a little off topic.

Referencing YouTube tracks is an extremely poor choice.

Attila wrote:Referencing YouTube tracks is an extremely poor choice.

*cough* Four Walls *cough*

/thread.

some people simply dont have the money to pursue their passion in producing music, buying music, and possibly dj. if you DO have the money thats a different case and you should be supporting the scene. but on a minimum wage job, one can barely afford gas and food nevermind thousands of dollars on production plugs/hardware/software and music on top of it for 1-6 dollars a song. i really dont see anything wrong with ripping from youtube to listen to the music you love if you just dont have the money to pay for it.
edit: obviously not to reference though.

refraining from writing a wall of text to respond to that

refrain as you will, the darkness within will overcome you, let the hate flow through you luke.

no hate, just think you should support the scenes we all love and enjoy so that we can keep enjoying them. music is a luxury, you don't NEED to have tunes. If you can't afford it there are plenty of weekly radio shows and tons of free giveaways to keep you happy. Blogs like Hedmuk make it impossible to miss out on any free tunes dudes are giving out, as well as shows like getdarker/rinse you can have hours of free music. no need to steal

As far as production stuff goes, aside from a computer, some cans and a DAW you don't have to spend a dime.

Immerse wrote:some people simply dont have the money to pursue their passion in producing music, buying music, and possibly dj. if you DO have the money thats a different case and you should be supporting the scene. but on a minimum wage job, one can barely afford gas and food nevermind thousands of dollars on production plugs/hardware/software and music on top of it for 1-6 dollars a song. i really dont see anything wrong with ripping from youtube to listen to the music you love if you just dont have the money to pay for it.
edit: obviously not to reference though.

very well, but if you want to pirate tunes dont do it from youtube

That's the lossy encoding miracle! mp3, mpg audio suck.

Downloading mixes is almost always better anyway. I have a habit of accidentally rinsing my entire library because it's not enough music for me. Mixes are awesome because i only have to download like, 40. Then i have music for about a month.

Attila wrote:

atticuh wrote:

123kidd wrote:Thats explains it. Yes these reference tracks are off youtube. Does the high frequency get cut off because of mp3 conversion, or just merely youtube quality?

No offense to the OP, because I was once a noob too, but usually publicly admitting that you steal what most people on these forums are trying to sell is literally asking to be viciously attacked. One day when you are no longer a noob, you will look back on what you said and laugh with the rest of us, but until that day comes, the community usually will never live this down.

People still try to sell music for profit? Are we in the right decade?

I think you're misinterpreting me when I say "sell music". Not only was I referring to the actual sales of music via analogue or digital medium, but also anything that encompasses being a professional musician which is not limited to playing shows, promoting your production blog, promoting your tutorials, etc. Basically anything that encompasses promoting yourself as a professional musician can all be reduced to selling yourself whether it's to a crowd, an A&R guy, a promoter or a fellow producer.

So, yes, people still sell music for profit. And, surprise, some people still do really well. I agree with you though, the old industry is dead, and selling songs alone is not a viable business model anymore.

Huts wrote:no need to steal

there is no stealing going on. the same thing is going on if one downloads a mix instead of downloading from YT. they simply arent receiving the money

I still prefer to pay more out of my pocket, so that more artists will be backed by the industry and given the necessary time/resources to devote their full-time efforts into the writing and production. No offense to anyone here who produces from their bedroom or basement, but to be honest i'm not interested in paying for most of your tunes. I wouldn't buy my own, if they were a nickel apiece. as much as that bruises my ego, its the truth.

perhaps a good point of reference, to spare us the question of electronic or acoustic records, is Radiohead. I want to be offered new shit that sounds that good, and face it, we don't.

If the future of the industry is $3.49 albums made by mugs like us, I'm going to be pissed at everyone who downloaded music for years and ruined the business. I'm not calling for a return to 80's prog rock/hair metal stature of way too much money, overblown industry entitlement both bands and execs were guilty of. But I do wish for a balance between accessibility and stardom. i LIKE big stars. They sound better than we are able to. sorry.