Dubstepforum.com

Phigure wrote:i think a big motivation behind this is for archival's sake, and that means storing in as high quality as is practical. obviously a lot of mixes, especially the old ones, aren't anywhere near 320, and that's fine, i just don't think we should be making anything lower quality than it is. but if something is lossless, then i think we should convert it down to a 320kbps mp3 (since most people cant tell between 320 and lossless anyways). let's be honest, the difference between something like 192 and 320 is only a couple tens of megabytes; i think that's space well spent for saving a bit of dubstep "history"

this.

as for what the archive will consist of, I'm thinking that a concerted effort should be made to collect as many classic mixes as possible, but I dont think it's out of the question to attempt to improve on the original concept. classics are being made every day, and we should recognize that by continuously updating it with whatever we deem of merit.

keep up the input!

this is a community effort and should thusly reflect the values of the community that supports it!

Nevalo wrote:just out of curiosity, has anyone spoken to deapoh?

nah he lives on a remote island in the south pacific now

jk, but for real, dude seems to have vanished

i cant wait to see this baby in action

Phigure wrote:

Nevalo wrote:just out of curiosity, has anyone spoken to deapoh?

nah he lives on a remote island in the south pacific now

jk, but for real, dude seems to have vanished

i know right? i was under the impression that he was working on barefiles 2.0.... but i guess hes no longer interested in doing that sort of thing.

well... guess thats what this community is for, keep the memory going!

i am in the process of contacting deapoh right now

Phigure wrote:let's be honest, the difference between something like 192 and 320 is only a couple tens of megabytes; i think that's space well spent for saving a bit of dubstep "history"

The difference between 192 and 320 is TERABYTES when you're hosting thousands upon thousands of files.
You're limited to whatever quality the mix was encoded at to begin with really. Not many people do 320 mixes. I don't if its over 30 mins.

£10 Bag wrote:

Phigure wrote:let's be honest, the difference between something like 192 and 320 is only a couple tens of megabytes; i think that's space well spent for saving a bit of dubstep "history"

The difference between 192 and 320 is TERABYTES when you're hosting thousands upon thousands of files.
You're limited to whatever quality the mix was encoded at to begin with really. Not many people do 320 mixes. I don't if its over 30 mins.

True, but let's be real. It'll be a while until we have that many files, and when we do, depending on the webhost we choose, compensating to allow for that storage demand wouldnt even be that pricey (or even at all, if we have an unlimited hosting plan), especially with services like cloud based hosting. if it comes down to it, i'll personally cover the additional cost to save the quality.

Don't see the point in storing large files which are essentially 192 or lower...

-Bump-

Got quite a lot of mixes to contribute. But didn't barefiles get shut down because of legal action from rinse?

great idea!

codeStep wrote:Got quite a lot of mixes to contribute. But didn't barefiles get shut down because of legal action from rinse?

No
that was a bit of trouble but it wasn't why deapoh closed it

Big ups to all willing to contribute

when will it be up and ready for submissions?

fractal wrote:i am in the process of contacting deapoh right now

Have you got some details you could pass on via PM? Cess wants to say hello and get him back on da beatz

First of all - great idea. An archive of dubstep mix history would be very welcome I think.

With regards to what should be uploaded, I would suggest that of course it would primarily be dubstep, but it could also include mixes from styles that immediately led up to it's formation.

So I mean particular mixes which provide a background to dubstep - ie latter-day / dark garage, instrumental grime (like Kode9, Youngsta, Hatcha and Plastician would frequently mix with the early dubstep)...

If the archive would be organised chronologically, I guess you'd start in the late '90s garage stuff > moving through some eski / early grime > Horsepower > Big Apple / FWD > old Youngsta sets etc...

Of course I'm just throwing out some ideas. But I feel giving dubstep history some sort of lineage / background context would be really useful. Because to a lot of people the boundaries of what actually constitues 'dubstep' and when it began are pretty blurred. To some people it's Horsepower, to some it's El-B, to some it's Skream & Benga. And there trully is no definitive answer, but if you provide people with perhaps a wider span, they can decide for themselves and even if it is going back a little further, it's always giving a nice picture of the sounds which the genre grew out from.

And I guess that if you want to give some sort of idea of when the genre has been, you should follow it up till the present with the various 'micro-scenes' that make the big whole of 'bass music' or whatever the fuck it's being called nowadays.

It could be difficult to decide what is and what isn't 'classic' or 'historic' though. I imagine some people might want to include stuff like Dub Police mixes and such. I get the feeling there may not be a consensus on that sort of thing...

Still - amazing idea.

I LIKE THIS IDEA A LOT

fractal wrote:

codeStep wrote:Got quite a lot of mixes to contribute. But didn't barefiles get shut down because of legal action from rinse?

No
that was a bit of trouble but it wasn't why deapoh closed it

Big ups to all willing to contribute

Why DID deapoh close it?

loooooooooooool was recently thinking about doing this, have some old barefile sets + some others which aren't easy to find if you'd like!

Grtz