curefans.com

From 1st november, posting mp3 in Curefans.com will be not allowed. There have been pros and cons, opinions expressed, but, what do you think about?. Vote! 8)

y???

many ppl can't play flac files..
for example, i can't!!

y???

i prefer the mp3 but , no way , you decide.

greetings

exploding boy

Look at this topic:

http://www.curefans.com/index.php/topic,3038

:smth023

David.

Quote from: Cure on October 31, 2006, 15:53:28
y???

many ppl can't play flac files..
for example, i can't!!

y???

My question is : what is the interest to put shows on flac when this shows are from a bad  source like most of the shows we can find. I agree with the new rule if the show are from soundboard or fm broadcasts. But if they are coming from audience source, it won't change anything about the sounding quality: it will be bad quality in lossless format, so bad quality at the end... the problem is not the format but the mix. If the mix is bad, you can have all lossless format you want, it will stay a bad mix with a bad sound, no???

A discussion about this was started many days ago in this topic:

http://www.curefans.com/index.php/topic,3003.0.html

Cheers,

David.

Quote from: yrbadrenau on October 31, 2006, 16:00:08
My question is : what is the interest to put shows on flac when this shows are from a bad  source like most of the shows we can find. I agree with the new rule if the show are from soundboard or fm broadcasts. But if they are coming from audience source, it won't change anything about the sounding quality: it will be bad quality in lossless format, so bad quality at the end... the problem is not the format but the mix. If the mix is bad, you can have all lossless format you want, it will stay a bad mix with a bad sound, no???

you know my opinion...  :smth011


"Great, FLAC or other loseless format will keep the quality of our Cure shows"
(http://smilies.vidahost.com/contrib/blackeye/lol.gif)

I think that there are many shows that doesn't matter if they're flac or mp3. The sound is awful anyway. So... Mp3 is still useful since it's a lot less space that it use.
Flac should be only used when you can get almost perfect sound.
I agree with yrbadrenau

Quote from: carnagevisors on October 31, 2006, 17:10:34
Mp3 is still useful since it's a lot less space that it use.

& i come 2 agree..

besides, is there any special reason 4 what we should stop sharin mp3's? i think it's the same.. everyone can convert the file if he wants, right?
so, what's the point?
i just can't understand it..
anyway

ps: many ppl don't have flac files 2 share, but mp3's, just like i do.. so, i won't b able 2 share any more shows if mp3's will stop bein shared..
but this sucks, right?

Quote from: Cure on October 31, 2006, 17:23:06
besides, is there any special reason 4 what we should stop sharin mp3's? i think it's the same.. everyone can convert the file if he wants, right?
so, what's the point?

again, please read the topic started about this earlier:

http://www.curefans.com/index.php/topic,3003.0.html

several different points leading to this decision were explained and discussed in there, so no need to repeat it i suppose.


but if i may add one point of view here: people keep repeating "these are bad sounding shows anyway, it's not worth it".
i suppose i can agree that one easily gets that kind of impression, that a lot of recordings suck and are hopelessly bad quality and so why bother - sure, a lot of the stuff uploaded in mp3s isn't great, a lot of it is almost impossible to listen to.
but does this mean that these are bad shows and not worth anything better? well, i think we shouldn't think that the commonly circulated mp3 versions are always some sort of faithful description of how the original version/recording sounds like(!), let alone they were the only versions of these shows that exist. so what if the shows aren't actually always that bad sounding but the versions circulating (in mp3s/other lossy files) are to blame? i think there's really a huge difference in there. there are certainly exceptions out there but it's clear that many mp3 copies were
1) simply sourced from a bad generated copy to start with
2) probably suffered too many sad mp3>wav>mp3>wav conversions over the years that made it deteriorate even more and more
3) in any case, they were of course already condemned to be partially destroyed in the beginning since somone converted them to mp3s in the first place (sorry but i never heard that lossy conversion made anything sound better than it was before... did you? ;)).

so, what i'm trying to say is that we are often dealing with some poorly encoded, ages old low bitrate mp3 version that were put into circulation in the beginning of the p2p era(!) and which are hopelessly outdated now - maybe we should remember this before saying "these are all such bad sounding shows, it's not worth it". in many cases the shows itself are just ok when you just get a chance to listen to a clean, good, uncompressed source.

and ok, of course from many shows no gorgeous recording exist. but there's nothing we can do to change it: some recordings are simply better than others: but the point is, even if it wasn't gorgeous then why not try to keep it as good as it can be?

Quote from: Cure on October 31, 2006, 17:23:06
i think it's the same.. everyone can convert the file if he wants, right?

please read the topic mentioned before. some well-knows issues of this was discussed in there too.

thanks.

I prefer the flac because I am more for quality than the quantity of concerts...........

:roll:

I Agree FLAC is a better format but there are people (like me) That still like mp3 ...
at least 192 or 320 ... but you decide  :cry:
Greetings from México!
Silvia

yeah ok.. but if someone wants 2 share stuff &  has no flac files?

anyway, i can't change it..
i accept it!

it's cure-stuff anyway ;)

hola Silvia

Hay 6200 shows publicados en formato MP3 que seguirán disponibles para que los descargues. Pero en adelante, Curefans.com incidirá más en la calidad que en la cantidad de bootlegs que se publiquen. Esperamos tu comprensión.

Saludos  8)

David.

Quote from: chivicure on October 31, 2006, 18:48:56
I Agree FLAC is a better format but there are people (like me) That still like mp3 ...
at least 192 or 320 ... but you decide  :cry:
Greetings from México!
Silvia

DAVID;

Segun entiendo esta medida no solo espara ocnservar la calidad de las grabaciones, si no tambien para que los miembros participen mas en las diversas discusiones, no se podria dejar una seccion de mp3 de buena calidad digamos 254 o 320 hacia arriba pero un poco como lo planteaba en un post anteriro, que solo los que consigan cierta cantidad de posteos a partir de entonces puedan tanto subir como bajar shows... esto puede aplicar tanto en Flac como en mp3... es solo una idea, ya que entiendo el punto de que no todos los shows estan disponibles en flac que creo que la idea es llegar a ese punto...

saludos

:rocker

Quote from: Darth Blood on October 31, 2006, 20:35:17
ya que entiendo el punto de que no todos los shows estan disponibles en flac que creo que la idea es llegar a ese punto...

saludos

:rocker

Si bueno ,,es cierto muchos shows no estan disponibles en flac Lástima pero haber como
nos ira con los flacs je'''
salu2

Yo creo que si hablamos de buena calidad, entonces habría que dejar de lado los mp3. Por otro lado, hay más de 6000 conciertos publicados en mp3 y personalmente no veo razón alguna para seguir en lo mismo. Es probable que el concierto "X" que alguien quiera publicar en mp3 ya haya sido subido.

La facilidad -por ser archivos pequeños- de los mp3, hace que muchas personas vengan al foro para bajar sus conciertos e irse. Con los FLAC pretendemos dejar de lado un poco eso del "subir y descargar" y promover, de cierta forma, la discusión en los otros foros.

Lo de la cantidad de posts es algo que también había sugerido al "Staff", pero no prosperó. Sin embargo, quizás se considere a futuro.

Saludos,

David.

Quote from: Darth Blood on October 31, 2006, 20:35:17
DAVID;

Segun entiendo esta medida no solo espara ocnservar la calidad de las grabaciones, si no tambien para que los miembros participen mas en las diversas discusiones, no se podria dejar una seccion de mp3 de buena calidad digamos 254 o 320 hacia arriba pero un poco como lo planteaba en un post anteriro, que solo los que consigan cierta cantidad de posteos a partir de entonces puedan tanto subir como bajar shows... esto puede aplicar tanto en Flac como en mp3... es solo una idea, ya que entiendo el punto de que no todos los shows estan disponibles en flac que creo que la idea es llegar a ese punto...

saludos

:rocker

Quote from: dsanchez on October 31, 2006, 20:54:42Yo creo que si hablamos de buena calidad, entonces habría que dejar de lado los mp3. Por otro lado, hay más de 6000 conciertos publicados en mp3 y personalmente no veo razón alguna para seguir en lo mismo. Es probable que el concierto "X" que alguien quiera publicar en mp3 ya haya sido subido.

Yo convengo. :smth023

ja aika mielenkiintoisia kieliuudistuksia näkyy myös sisältyvän näihin ämpeekolmos-hautajaisiin myös...?
:smth023 :roll:

Hi,

I´m with all of you, who would prefer FLAC or other lossless formats,if the source is ok and the recording worth of it.If not,the recording is just for "hunters and collectors " not for people who try to breathe the atmosphere of a great concert.

Tom     

I Think it's a sad day...I prefair also good quality shows but I think and a lot of people with me that you also can share good mp3 shows.If a show sounds good it makes no different if it is in mp3 , flac  or whatever ...but that's mine opinion.
It is easier for me to upload mp3 than flac because I have everything in mp3 and flac version is not my thing.
Is it maybe a good idea to make two topics like ceho have..one for mp3 and one for Flac etc,etc.

Not reason to be sad. There are thousands of mp3 shows left here. In the other side, we have just a hundred of FLAC shows.

I want to point, again, that the main focus in this forum is the discussion, and that NO-ONE is obligated to upload shows. Indeed we like more when people discuss, open new topics, etc.

Cheers.

David.

Quote from: Roan on October 31, 2006, 21:40:30
I Think it's a sad day...I prefair also good quality shows but I think and a lot of people with me that you also can share good mp3 shows.If a show sounds good it makes no different if it is in mp3 , flac  or whatever ...but that's mine opinion.
It is easier for me to upload mp3 than flac because I have everything in mp3 and flac version is not my thing.
Is it maybe a good idea to make two topics like ceho have..one for mp3 and one for Flac etc,etc.

No "hunters of collectors" (like this freak http://www.geocities.com/momentinblack/ (http://www.geocities.com/momentinblack/)) are allowed here. We will go on sharing, but with quality over quantity  :smth023

David.

Quote from: Strunz4 on October 31, 2006, 21:18:20
Hi,

I´m with all of you, who would prefer FLAC or other lossless formats,if the source is ok and the recording worth of it.If not,the recording is just for "hunters and collectors " not for people who try to breathe the atmosphere of a great concert.

Tom     

great idea  :rocker
No more mp3

Great, we don't need the mp3 garbage anymore !  :-D
This is just my point of view of course...

It's very easy to use "FLAC Frontend" for encoding or decoding songs.
And it's free !

Quote from: dsanchez on October 31, 2006, 22:05:18
No "hunters of collectors" (like this freak http://www.geocities.com/momentinblack/ (http://www.geocities.com/momentinblack/)) are allowed here. We will go on sharing, but with quality over quantity  :smth023

David.

Good call David!!!  "No Trades + No Updates = No Bullshit". 

Quote from: j on October 31, 2006, 22:56:36

Quote from: dsanchez on October 31, 2006, 22:05:18
No "hunters of collectors" (like this freak http://www.geocities.com/momentinblack/ (http://www.geocities.com/momentinblack/)) are allowed here. We will go on sharing, but with quality over quantity  :smth023

David.

Good call David!!!  "No Trades + No Updates = No Bullshit". 

Yes. That's the most stupid page I've ever seen  :). Hope no-one of use will arrive to this point of freak.

Cheers,

David.

what the f*ck is this site??
stupid!!!

No doubt, that quality of flac is much better than mp3. People who don't see differents just try listen same show in mp3 and next in flac format. Then you understand.
I could share some hundreds of cure shows in flac and shn and a lot of dvd's as well, but in my opinion sharing by megaupload makes no sense. Uploading for example 700 mb takes to much time, usually some hours. Anyway I have no own web site, where I could share. So I use 2 kinds of  sharing (and downloading too). First - hub by DC++ (dc.bootlegarchive.com) and second cure torent tracker (PPTT).
Users on bootlegarchive share all of the music in high quality (flac, shn, ape), non official of course, including a lot of cure shows. If you want to check it, just register on http://www.bootlegarchive.com/. Also most of us know cure torrent tracker. Members of PPTT share only lossles cure shows.
Regards

Quote from: blue on November 01, 2006, 11:09:48
No doubt, that quality of flac is much better than mp3. People who don't see differents just try listen same show in mp3 and next in flac format. Then you understand.
I could share some hundreds of cure shows in flac and shn and a lot of dvd's as well, but in my opinion sharing by megaupload makes no sense. Uploading for example 700 mb takes to much time, usually some hours. Anyway I have no own web site, where I could share. So I use 2 kinds of  sharing (and downloading too). First - hub by DC++ (dc.bootlegarchive.com) and second cure torent tracker (PPTT).
Users on bootlegarchive share all of the music in high quality (flac, shn, ape), non official of course, including a lot of cure shows. If you want to check it, just register on http://www.bootlegarchive.com/. Also most of us know cure torrent tracker. Members of PPTT share only lossles cure shows.
Regards

i went 2 the site, tried 2 register & saw some questions i have 2 answer..
what's that?
& can i only share bootlegs vis dc++ ??

i went 2 the site, tried 2 register & saw some questions i have 2 answer..
what's that?
& can i only share bootlegs vis dc++ ??
[/quote]

Just read rules on the site. Generally the rules contain answers for questions during registration.
One of the main rule is sharing min. 5 GB lossless music. But of course you can download as well as share, due to P2P work  :smth020

yeah but i don't have 1gb non-mp2 stuff..
u c, i only have mp3's & videos..
so i'm unable 2 get access 2 the site?

oh, & btw, what about the poll??
as u can c, the majority still likes mp3..

so, it's meaningless 2 say our opinion, right?
i mean that the whole thing of the poll was useless..

Quote from: Cure on November 01, 2006, 14:05:36
yeah but i don't have 1gb non-mp2 stuff..
u c, i only have mp3's & videos..
so i'm unable 2 get access 2 the site?

for the beggining you have to share only 1 GB lossless music, just after some time you have to up your share to min 5 GB, but it is easy if you are downloading and next sharing same music.
Read rules : http://www.bootlegarchive.com/faq.asp

Quote from: Cure on November 01, 2006, 14:07:09
oh, & btw, what about the poll??
as u can c, the majority still likes mp3..

so, it's meaningless 2 say our opinion, right?
i mean that the whole thing of the poll was useless..

first of all, nobody's opinion is meaningless, everyone can speak up their opinion here.  :!:
but please note that the poll says "What do you think about the decision taken by Curefans.com?" - so the poll was mainly up because the staff is interested to hear what members think about this new decision, just like there was the other thread (mentioned before) open for discussions and comments already much earlier.

maybe we could also note that these issues connected to "lossless sharing vs. lossy sharing" have never really been discussed in public on the forums before (at least that i know about it). i suppose that mp3s/other lossy & compressed formats just somehow have been considered as an "ideal" sharing format on the web without ever really questioning the consequences of it. so lossy formats simply have been taken for granted (amazingly), although they clearly have caused a lot of decreasing of overall quality over the years. :!:  well, the favoring of compressed formats was somehow understandable in the old times when most everyone had only slow modem conncetions, but since the overall speed has increased hugely there's really no such excuse anymore - that is if it even ever was any kind of reasonable excuse at all...
anyway, personally i'd think it's about time to try and do something about it.

about sharing in general, i think blue had good points about it: the likes of megaupload are simply nowhere near any kind of ideal way of mass-sharing, systems like torrents are much better for that - and those work on a lossless basis, not on mp3s. so, if one wants to join torrents, mp3s are not getting anyone anywhere anyway. and let's also remember that good ol' trading is a good way of exchanging shows too. we could also think that the flac shows that get uploaded here can help many members starting to build a collection with tradeable lossless shows, therefore providing them an opportunity to get more such shows in the future, either via torrents or trading. so the purpose of all this surely isn't to prevent people from sharing, but trying to take the level of quality of the shared shows higher - which i'd like to think would benefit everyone in the community in the end.
so, putting up a collection of lossless shows: it can take a little time and effort to get oneself started but if one wants to do it, here are some possibilities/opportunities.

and i do understand that the change might feel harsh for some members, but i personally wouldn't see it as a fully tragic situation after all: because as mentioned here many times before, we should remember that the forum was never supposed to be primarily a hub and a sharing facility anyway, but a place for discussion and meeting other people, making contacts - well, also exchanging a few shows every now and then.
but i suppose we could afford it to share less but then maybe discuss more? exchange thoughts and not just files sets...?  ;)
or would that be "wishing for impossible things"? i'd like to believe no....

m

hehe who can see into the poll who has winn?
i see more point for the mp3 in this poll

I stopped downloading mp3 quite a while ago, so I'm fine with this new rule. Yet, concerning FLAC files, you already have tons of torrent trackers and DC++ hubs providing them. I guess that curefans will face hard competition... with a serious disadvantage: with torrent trackers people don't need to spend half a day uploading their files on megaupload.com before others start to get them. Also, with the torrent system you can download only the files you want or a sample first to check sound quality. Here it is often not possible. Should I also mention that megaupload links expire and so on...

This is a very friendly site but unless you really think about how you want to deal with your new rules in the future many people may leave the boat and curefans look more like an empty shell than anything else. I'm sure some people will keep sharing their comments but it may not be the same.

So, why not compromising ? Let say when no lossless FLAC are available then mp3 should be fine. When 320 mp3 are available then replace 160mp3, etc... It's a way to keep the best available quality and keep the Curefans spirit.

All the best anyway. I guess it has been a hard decision to take !!

Joelad

Quote from: Joelad3 on November 01, 2006, 16:36:34
[...] Yet, concerning FLAC files, you already have tons of torrent trackers and DC++ hubs providing them. I guess that curefans will face hard competition... with a serious disadvantage: with torrent trackers people don't need to spend half a day uploading their files on megaupload.com before others start to get them. Also, with the torrent system you can download only the files you want or a sample first to check sound quality. Here it is often not possible. Should I also mention that megaupload links expire and so on... [...]

bingo, I agree in 100 %  :smth023

Quote from: Joelad3 on November 01, 2006, 16:36:34
I stopped downloading mp3 quite a while ago, so I'm fine with this new rule. Yet, concerning FLAC files, you already have tons of torrent trackers and DC++ hubs providing them. I guess that curefans will face hard competition... with a serious disadvantage: with torrent trackers people don't need to spend half a day uploading their files on megaupload.com before others start to get them. Also, with the torrent system you can download only the files you want or a sample first to check sound quality. Here it is often not possible. Should I also mention that megaupload links expire and so on...

This is a very friendly site but unless you really think about how you want to deal with your new rules in the future many people may leave the boat and curefans look more like an empty shell than anything else. I'm sure some people will keep sharing their comments but it may not be the same.

So, why not compromising ? Let say when no lossless FLAC are available then mp3 should be fine. When 320 mp3 are available then replace 160mp3, etc... It's a way to keep the best available quality and keep the Curefans spirit.

All the best anyway. I guess it has been a hard decision to take !!

Joelad

what comes to 'hard competition', i don't think curefans never wanted to be a hub - maybe it became that way lately and that's why certain decisions were made recently. good or bad? well, at least i don't think anyone imagined it to be a simple decision. will it make some members less active and even leave? maybe, even probably so, unfortunately. but maybe it will also activate some members who haven't been interested in participating so far(?). maybe. we'll see, i guess. but at least, no-one here is being told to leave - like has happened on some other forums...
but yes, i do see your points there. and what comes to the use of megaupload, i do agree: it's not very practical. but that's why it has been suggested several times that members of the staff with extra ftp space can host the shows too. i've uploaded a few to a "local" ftp here and they've been shared that way - worked fine. ok, i still had to spend time uploading it all but at least those links don't expire. and maybe the upload speed was even faster too. and of course, it doesn't beat the torrent system where you can just start sharing straight from your HD. but again, be it good or bad: were we ever really able compete with trackers anyway? were we even supposed to?

what comes to the worry of not being able to check the quality of the downloads: i think it's pretty easy to solve and it also has been suggested several times here that people uploading would also upload a separate sample - it really doesn't take long to do that. so i'd suggest it would definitely be a good guideline for all future uploads.
(besides, the same idea of sample uploading was already suggested in related to mp3s too: it wouldn't have hurt there either - quite on the contrary, considering the poor quality of most mp3s. at least i stopped downloading mp3s completely at some point, often even passing shows that i didn't have, just because of all the repeated disappointments. :?)

what comes to mp3s and compromising: i'd like to think the reasons for saying 'no' to them in general were discussed quite thoroughly and several issues/problems with sticking to mp3s were raised before this decision was made. and even if we'd take a more moderate attitude towards it i think it simply would be pretty impossible to control, to judge which mp3s are "good enough" and which aren't. i do see the points behind your suggestion, how versions could be upgraded: but it's also quite problematic since i cannot see how it would work without some kind of effective seeder's forum where people compared their versions first before anyone uploaded. and i think that would be pretty restrictive too, and in some ways i think it's still closer to "the curefans spirit" if we maintain the atmosphere where people can still share without consulting some kind of board first and ask for a "permission" for upping something.(?)

m

I recently stop to download torrent because I have a problem to download the shows, I read somewhere that my provider block the P2P files !!!

So I'm very happy that CUREFANS share FLAC shows !!! :-D

If someone have a solution ???

My provider is "FREE"...

yeah, but doesn't dling from torrent sites need registration? cuz there's a q there.. am i wrong?

it´s a strange... you don´t think about fans who has low speed connection to internet... flac files are so big

Well,first of all i agree with this new decision pointing on flac or other lossless formats for several reasons (most of them hugely and well explained by Marika some posts before).
Just i wanted to focus on a particular:
when we talk about shows quality of lossless formats,we should better talk of "integrity".
I mean we can have a wonderful sounding mp3 show and an awful sounding flac one..so we must intend,IMO,a flac concert as the closest possible to the original recording(that can be excellent or terrible).
My idea is that there're people still considering flac=wonderful sound and that's not  true (i wish it was .. :roll: )..but it's the only way to preserve the original recording as best as possible.  ;)
Have a nice day :-D

Quote from: monghi on November 02, 2006, 07:11:45
it´s a strange... you don´t think about fans who has low speed connection to internet... flac files are so big

People with slow connections have actually 6200 mp3 bootlegs to download. If any of them wants one who is not there and have problems with the internet connection, they always can reach us to curefans@gmail.com or post their wish in the "Request" section. We will help them!

Cheers,

David.

Hello Cure,

Do not worry. We will post FLAC shows here on a regular basis, and you won't need torrent access or something else for downloading (also I want to point that not everyone can access to torrent because of permissions in certain networks).

Cheers

David.

Quote from: Cure on November 01, 2006, 14:05:36
yeah but i don't have 1gb non-mp2 stuff..
u c, i only have mp3's & videos..
so i'm unable 2 get access 2 the site?

thanx david ;)

btw, can i convert the flac files 2 mp3 with a program?

I wrote some notes about how to play FLAC files here

http://www.curefans.com/index.php/topic,3038.0.html

Let us know if this is what you wanted.

:smth023

David.

Quote from: Cure on November 02, 2006, 17:32:02
thanx david ;)

btw, can i convert the flac files 2 mp3 with a program?

What is all this bureaucratic nonsense?

FLAC is great for soundboard/fm shows, but I don't really see the point in wasting precious bandwith and storage capacity on audience recordings. Who cares if an audience recording - which is low quality anyway - is MP3 or FLAC? What difference does it make?

Furthermore, there are shows that are simply not available in FLAC format. Would you rather not have the show at all, just because it's MP3?

I'd say, as long as the downloads are properly labelled (and that includes the information if it is sbd/fm or audience!), people should be allowed to upload anything they want to. The downloaders should be able to judge for themselves wheather or not it is worth downloading.

Every forum has certain rules and this is the first one we decided. So we ask for your cooperation and understanding in this one. Also, the pros and cos of FLAC shows have been discussed a lot in the past days. Let's see how the forum goes in this way and if it does not improve the thing (to have more discussions in the forum), I am -personally speaking- open to new discussions. It's not the end of the world guys, is just our first "rule". It's so hard?... there are literally THOUSANDS of mp3 shows already.

Cheers,

David.

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 02, 2006, 19:18:37
What is all this bureaucratic nonsense?

FLAC is great for soundboard/fm shows, but I don't really see the point in wasting precious bandwith and storage capacity on audience recordings. Who cares if an audience recording - which is low quality anyway - is MP3 or FLAC? What difference does it make?

Furthermore, there are shows that are simply not available in FLAC format. Would you rather not have the show at all, just because it's MP3?

I'd say, as long as the downloads are properly labelled (and that includes the information if it is sbd/fm or audience!), people should be allowed to upload anything they want to. The downloaders should be able to judge for themselves wheather or not it is worth downloading.

Ow that sounds so bad to me ... I don't like the idea of restriction of anything. I am afraid that the forum would become very elistist and no more tolerant (to people enjoying mp3).

An exemple is the Plastic Passion torrent where it was almost forbidden to speak about mp3 (I know it's perhaps too much) and it became very intolerant ... (and that's why I never wanted to register on that site, if I would ever been allowed to ...).

What I like in curefans.com is its openness. Since the beginning of this forum last year it was possible to find and speak about anything in the format you wanted.

At the end of course I fully understand (and agree !) that you all want the quality before all. And I also prefer by far a good quality show. But I already downloaded flac shows that I was unable to listen to, the sound was so bad (don't remember the show, I think it was a 1981 one).

So I hope Curefans will not become too closed ... Why not do one section for FLAC shows and another for MP3 ?

Quote from: Yves28 on November 02, 2006, 20:32:22
So I hope Curefans will not become too closed ... Why not do one section for FLAC shows and another for MP3 ?

Well here we go ... now we have a "child board" for mp3 shows ... Isn't it a bit denigrating ?!?  :(

Quote from: Yves28 on November 02, 2006, 20:37:27

Quote from: Yves28 on November 02, 2006, 20:32:22
So I hope Curefans will not become too closed ... Why not do one section for FLAC shows and another for MP3 ?

Well here we go ... now we have a "child board" for mp3 shows ... Isn't it a bit denigrating ?!?  :(

sorry, i'm not entirely sure what you mean by denigrating, if you mean the way of expression itself(?). in that case, there are also other "child boards" on the site - and for instance  in the technical section it's all the FLAC stuff that's placed there.  ;)
of course, sorry if misunderstood you.

m

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 02, 2006, 19:18:37
Furthermore, there are shows that are simply not available in FLAC format. Would you rather not have the show at all, just because it's MP3?

interesting question considering that the impression here seems to be that only FM/soundboard are worth sharing/listening/even existing(?).
so, i suppose the question could also be: would you rather not have the show at all, just because it's an audience recording...?
;)

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 02, 2006, 21:48:45

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 02, 2006, 19:18:37
Furthermore, there are shows that are simply not available in FLAC format. Would you rather not have the show at all, just because it's MP3?

would you rather not have the show at all, just because it's an audience recording...?

Exactly. I used to listen to audience recordings back then, when the resources on live material were quite limited. That was 15 years ago. Nowadays, there are so many soundboard/fm shows available that I can live without all those barely listenable audience recordings.

And the difference between sdb/fm and audience is much bigger than the difference between flac and mp3, so what's you point anyway? I'd take a mp3 soundboard recording over a flac audience recording any day!

As I said before ... I prefer flac for soundboard/fm shows, but does it really matter if an AUDIENCE recording is flac or mp3? I think mp3 is more than sufficient for that purpose.

It would be far more important that the downloads are labelled correctly as SOUNDBOARD/FM or AUDIENCE redordings. I really don't want to waste time downloading a whole show (possibly in flac, so it would take even longer), just to find out that it's just an audience recording.

Quote from: Yves28 on November 02, 2006, 20:32:22
An exemple is the Plastic Passion torrent where it was almost forbidden to speak about mp3 (I know it's perhaps too much) and it became very intolerant ... (and that's why I never wanted to register on that site, if I would ever been allowed to ...).

I did register there. I contributed three shows, and then I was banned because I dared to speak my mind.

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 02, 2006, 19:18:37
What is all this bureaucratic nonsense?

FLAC is great for soundboard/fm shows, but I don't really see the point in wasting precious bandwith and storage capacity on audience recordings. Who cares if an audience recording - which is low quality anyway - is MP3 or FLAC? What difference does it make?

Furthermore, there are shows that are simply not available in FLAC format. Would you rather not have the show at all, just because it's MP3?

I'd say, as long as the downloads are properly labelled (and that includes the information if it is sbd/fm or audience!), people should be allowed to upload anything they want to. The downloaders should be able to judge for themselves wheather or not it is worth downloading.

Well, the people that record shows care.  The people that have uncirculated and uncommon shows care.  Fans that like to properly eq shows care.  Traders who are tired of getting lossy shows in trades when they were assured of getting lossless ones care.  And it seems the staff of Curefans cares.    

And some shows not being available in flac? :smth017  If a show was recorded it's available in flac.  

mp3 is still very much current.  However, technology is always moving forward.  Manufacturers of portable audio/media players are starting to add flac to the supported formats.  Hard Drives are getting bigger.  Our internet connections getting faster.  Shouldn't we move forward as well?    

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 02, 2006, 23:18:11
As I said before ... I prefer flac for soundboard/fm shows, but does it really matter if an AUDIENCE recording is flac or mp3? I think mp3 is more than sufficient for that purpose.

and as i said before, i've heard numerous gorgeous audience recordings and i've also heard FMs/soundboards that are just plain screwed up because the mix isn't good or they are even in wrong speed (like monterrey '92) or something like that.
so i personally don't agree with this generalization that audience recordings in general are pure crap.
and also, like said before, since everyone's free to choose what to download anyway, so what's the fuzz? if somebody isn't interested in audience recordings, then it's not a problem - he/she may choose to pass those. personally i am interested in audience recordings and then yes it does matter to me what the format is - mostly because ALL editing/remastering is impossible after it's condemned to mp3s/some other lossy format. that's the end of the story. if we'd have pristine soundboards from just about everything, maybe it wouldn't matter that much. but we don't. so there is a huge difference there.

and well, i don't want to come across harshly here but frankly it just always strikes me a bit odd, to hear people coming across a bit like "i think these shows are complete sh*t so you don't need to have it in any better format either". to put it frankly, if you don't care about audience recordings in general then why should your opinion be a guideline for those people who do care? please see that i'd just like to propse this question to you in a friendly manner here. because personally i don't see any problem if someone here doesn't like audience recordings, it's just fine. so like i said, what's the fuzz? if you think downloading an audience show is a waste of time, then you don't have to embark on it in the first, right? simple as that.
but i also might see what you are referring to here too, which is that all shows uploaded here would need much more detailed descriptions of the contents/sources/generation than has been put up so far - and on this i surely do agree. :!:
personally i'd think it should be actually compulsory, to provide all the information you have of your recordings and not just stash it up there without details. one cannot force everyone to be hugely interested in keeping detailed records of all the informattion concerning the shows one has, but that's exactly why people include little text files with that information with the uploads, to make it easy to pass the information! but still some people just immediately toss them  away delete them as useless - "not important for me". well, like i said, one cannot force people to get enthusiastic about it, but maybe they could consider that someone else out there might care. so i think people could think of it as good will towards other members the community, to try and keep the information intact.
because maybe i'm just as disappointed as you are when i sometimes download something and notice it's a poor quality generated-to-death audience recording - at least it would have helped a lot if i had been notified of that before i started downloading the damn thing. but this doesn't make me hate audience recording in general! it only makes me wish people would care to try and provide some information. and especially  since flac files sets are pretty large, a sample song would be a good option. i think this would really benefit everyone.

...

THERE IS REALLY NO EXCUSE FOR THIS ISSUE!

MP3 IS BETTER THAN FLAC

REASONS?!

1) MP3 IS FASTER FOR DOWNLOADING
2) MP3 IS EASIER FOR COLLECTING  (UP TO TEN BOOTS PER CD)
3) MP3 IS AFTER ALL - A FAIR QUALITY SOUNDING (FOR BOOT... , REMEMBER TAPES?!?!?!)

-----


SO?!

I DONT REALLY CARE, I HAVE (ALMOST) ALL I SEARCHED BY NOW!

BUT THERE IS LOTS AND LOTS AND LOTS OF KIDS WITH BAD CONNECTIONS AND LITTLK KNOWLEDGE AND SMALL AMOUNT OF FRIENDS ONLINE!!!


AND THEY ALL NEED MP3 FILES TO GET STUFF QUICKLY!


SO, f*ck FLAC!
f*ck ALL LOSLESS FORMATS UR THEIR STUPID ASSES!


:rocker

Quote from: Janko on November 03, 2006, 00:32:39
MP3 IS AFTER ALL - A FAIR QUALITY SOUNDING (FOR BOOT... , REMEMBER TAPES?!?!?!)

So, you're satisfied with fair quality?  I'm not. 

Quote from: Janko on November 03, 2006, 00:32:39
AND THEY ALL NEED MP3 FILES TO GET STUFF QUICKLY!

and they will get in Curefans.com more than 6000 mp3 shows when they want.

that's not enough?

Quote from: crowbi_wan on November 02, 2006, 23:36:03
Fans that like to properly eq shows care.

I still don't think that it matters when it comes to audience recordings, but anyway ...

Quote from: crowbi_wan on November 02, 2006, 23:36:03
Traders who are tired of getting lossy shows in trades when they were assured of getting lossless ones care.

Now you'll get even more tired traders. If mp3 is prohibited around here, some people will probably convert their mp3 shows to flac and post them here anyway. This will add even more confusion to "the people who care" as well as to normal people.

Quote from: crowbi_wan on November 02, 2006, 23:36:03And some shows not being available in flac? :smth017  If a show was recorded it's available in flac.

I can't give you an example, but I'm sure that there are recordings out there that exist in mp3 only. Maybe someone somewhere has lossless version, but he doesn't even know this place or he is simply unwilling to share his version. What then?

Quote from: crowbi_wan on November 02, 2006, 23:36:03
Shouldn't we move forward as well?

Of course we should. But we should also let people decide for themselves what they want to download.

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 02, 2006, 23:52:54
since everyone's free to choose what to download anyway, so what's the fuzz? if somebody isn't interested in audience recordings, then it's not a problem - he/she may choose to pass those.

But you have to know if it is an audience recording BEFORE you download the show. That's why I'd like the downloads labelled correctly.

And if everyone is free to choose what to download anyway, why not allow mp3 AND flac and let people decide for themselves?

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 02, 2006, 23:52:54
to hear people coming across a bit like "i think these shows are complete sh*t so you don't need to have it in any better format either".

I might put it in different words, but that's how I see it! Why using a lossless format on something that has very little to loose in the first place? But, to each his own. I only think that mp3 should still be allowed as an alternative for people who are a little less fanatic.

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 02, 2006, 23:52:54
but i also might see what you are referring to here too, which is that all shows uploaded here would need much more detailed descriptions of the contents/sources/generation than has been put up so far - and on this i surely do agree. :!:

:smth023

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 03, 2006, 21:11:07

Quote from: crowbi_wan on November 02, 2006, 23:36:03
Shouldn't we move forward as well?

Of course we should. But we should also let people decide for themselves what they want to download.

We have to remember that mp3 was invented over 10 years ago. Back then, internet connections crawled compared to now. Even then, people still managed to get stuff. So it's all relative, no?

For me, I just see more of the same â€" that "more more more" is better. Well, I disagree.

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 03, 2006, 21:11:07
But we should also let people decide for themselves what they want to download.

exactly. and the only way to let people decide anything at all is to upload in original  uncompressed format - because if one decides to convert it to lossy format before sharing then any possiblity for deciding anything at all is permanently lost: you cannot undo the lossy compression once it's there = there's no decisions left to make, even if one wanted to.

so if you happen to choose to download what you think is a crappy sounding audience recording and then want to convert to mp3s just to save your HD space, then fine. but the sharing should originally take place in the original format so that people have some kind of possibility to choose anything at all. that's why it can be said that it should be a moral responsibility to try and keep the quality level of internet sharing as high as possible. please think of it as just like you don't like to be forced to download audience recordings you don't enjoy, there are also people who don't like someone out there making decision for others that some sad 128 kb/s horror is supposed to be just good enough for everyone.

and yes, i also think that times have changed. mp3s are a temporary format for your portable player, they are personal disposable copies, not source files for sharing.
(by the way, that's why it always amazes me that people are actually paying for mp3s in some internet download stores. surely you should pay for the real thing, regardless of whether you go and buy a cd or buy a download - but paying for lossy files? hmm.)

Quote from: lostflower4 on November 03, 2006, 22:05:53
We have to remember that mp3 was invented over 10 years ago. Back then, internet connections crawled compared to now. Even then, people still managed to get stuff. So it's all relative, no?

For me, I just see more of the same â€" that "more more more" is better. Well, I disagree.

I don't mind if mp3 format is 10 yo... Mp3 is still "compact", "flexible", etc.
Actually we have a lot of "Mp3 players", not "FLAC players", for example.
I'm not fanatic of "pure sound" or of "original recordings". And, like me, other people want still mp3 format.
But these are just opinions.
I don't understand only why the users of this nice forum cannot "CHOOSE". The succes of curefans.com (just my opinion) is the "freedom in choice" and wide variety of the fans that are registered here.

Finally, I'm just a fan who likes stay in this nice place and who accepts the staff's decisions, although different from my opinion.

Let me just make another point here. There have been way to many 128 kbps (and lower!) mp3 shows shared on here recently. And depending on what encoder/encoding method was used, some of these sound FAR inferior to their lossless counterparts. And yes, these were AUDIENCE recordings.

So what are we to do? Make some rule that that only 192 kbps and up is allowed? Well, then I know what would happen. People would be recompressing their mp3's to a higher bitrate. :smth011

As for lossless formats, there are usually ways to tell if something sourced from lossy files. Conversely, there is no way to compare the quality of mp3 encoding other than comparing everything against other files and the original, which is just time consuming and senseless.

Quote from: gioez on November 04, 2006, 00:46:37
I don't mind if mp3 format is 10 yo... Mp3 is still "compact", "flexible", etc.

but what is "flexible" in mp3? it is completely NON-flexible because one cannot make it back to original wav audio!
lossless wav is flexible because you can make it mp3 for your ipod if you need.
there is nothing flexible in mp3 in this way.
so if you really want to CHOOSE like you are wishing, you need original wav audio - you cannot CHOOSE anything if only thing to have is mp3/other lossy file. what can you choose then?
so sorry, but i don't undestand this point.

and why people talk of "fanatics for original recordings"? i see the prefering of lossless as possibility to try serve also those people who not like mp3. i have watched it and i notice that many people have original silver bootlegs for many shows and they want to share them (which is great because fans not should be paying for boot!) but they immediately convert to mp3 - even if they have the original CD in their possession? what the point? i don't undestand.
(and many people complain "i not have any lossless shows" - but i think many people have some of these silver boots at least, if nothing more. i think i know this to be true.) 

so you not have to be some kind of fanatic to prefer lossless shows. and it is not elitist to try to offer lossless files only.
elitist thing: elitist is to sit on your collection and say "i have this and i have that but i not share with you" - this is to be elitist.
or to go out and tape and tell everyone "i tape this how" and then never let anyone else hear it.


and im very sorry to notice it but i feel like so many people here who prefer mp3 and to forget the point that mp3 is forever mp3 and it never becomes anything else! so it never help people who not like mp3 - but people who like mp3 can download flac file and make it mp3. it not work both ways!
so when saying this new rule is bad because it hurt people who like mp3, you maybe not thinking that to prefer mp3 hurt people who like lossless. and because mp3 is forever mp3 it never any possibility for people who prefer lossless music. but people who prefer mp3 always benefit from lossless.


and this:

Quote
MP3 IS BETTER THAN FLAC

REASONS?!

1) MP3 IS FASTER FOR DOWNLOADING
2) MP3 IS EASIER FOR COLLECTING  (UP TO TEN BOOTS PER CD)
3) MP3 IS AFTER ALL - A FAIR QUALITY SOUNDING (FOR BOOT... , REMEMBER TAPES?!?!?!)

hey what kind of guideline is this something like "because this is nice and quick and easy it mean it is BEST??"
sorry i don't understand at all. because it is the same as you say all shit quality replica products are better than the original  product they try to imitating and hey this cheap crap watch i just buy is better than the original quality watch it try to imitate, it is better because it was so cheap and easy to get and i don't care if it's shit and break apart very soon so i have to buy new one  because it's simply great because it was cheap and easy! and hey i also love fast food best because it is quick and easy and so  all gourmet food is complete shit because it take time to prepare it and it take some effort and i hate all kind of effort i only want everything very fast for me and so it is so much easier to go and eat shit quality hamburgers all the time and i think it's even great for my health!

sorry but this FAST AND EASY IS THE BEST is just crap way to think if you think about it even second!

Quote
AND THEY ALL NEED MP3 FILES TO GET STUFF QUICKLY!

they all need? i don't undestand: please tell me any reason why it must be quickly?

i ask: what is the value of thinking everything must be "fast fast fast more more more faster faster faster"??
i can see no value in this. if there some value here, then value is in the quality of the show/music. not in how fast or slow you get it.
sorry, this make no sense to me.

Quote
SO, f*ck FLAC!
f*ck ALL LOSLESS FORMATS UR THEIR STUPID ASSES!

hey sorry very much  but this is like craziest thing i ever hear in this board.
because f*ck LOSLESS?: hey excuse me but i think you should then say: f*ck LOSSLESS SO f*ck MP3 BECAUSE MP3 BECOMES FROM f*cking AWFUL FLAC FILES! because mp3 is not born out of nowhere, so if you say I HATE FLAC I HATE LOSSLESS FILES then you are saying f*ck THIS MUSIC! 
well ok for me if you hate music then but why you listen to it?
i not looking for argument but this is my opinion. so sorry for my words but i think this is just completely crazy talk.

thanks.

Quote from: slit-the-cats-like-cheese on November 04, 2006, 01:48:34
hey what kind of guideline is this something like "because this is nice and quick and easy it mean it is BEST??"
sorry i don't understand at all. because it is the same as you say all shit quality replica products are better than the original  product they try to imitating and hey this cheap crap watch i just buy is better than the original quality watch it try to imitate, it is better because it was so cheap and easy to get and i don't care if it's shit and break apart very soon so i have to buy new one  because it's simply great because it was cheap and easy! and hey i also love fast food best because it is quick and easy and so  all gourmet food is complete shit because it take time to prepare it and it take some effort and i hate all kind of effort i only want everything very fast for me and so it is so much easier to go and eat shit quality hamburgers all the time and i think it's even great for my health!

sorry but this FAST AND EASY IS THE BEST is just crap way to think if you think about it even second!

:smth005

There's actually a lot of truth in these words...

It's nice to see discussions in the forum, altought with different opiniones, I think it's nice to read what others thinks and make our own opinion.

Personally speaking I didn't agree with the Curefans Staff about the idea of switching to losseless audio section in the forum and letting out the mp3 files, cause I knew some people wouldn't like that. But in the end they convinced me and I think there are good reasons for this:

1) first, it's evident that it's best to share shows in the best quality as possible, keeping the quality of the original bootleg. That's only possible now with formats like FLAC or SHN, they allow us to compress the file more than WAV without losing the quality.-

2) second, I don't see what's the problem about stoping sharing mp3. First, there are already THOUSANDS mp3 bootlegs in this forum. Second, there are a dozen of sites who actually are sharing this format. That means, all the people who likes MP3 can find them very easy and quickly everywhere. So why not make the difference and focus on quality?. Why not make Curefans.com a forum where you can discuss about your great band but also where you can share bootlegs with good sound, high quality, loseless format?.

3) finally, people can download flac shows here and convert them to mp3 for their own, personal use. So no problem in playing the files in their favourite Ipod, altought I hear the new ones are supporting already FLAC files.

Cheers,

David.

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 04, 2006, 00:42:08

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 03, 2006, 21:11:07
But we should also let people decide for themselves what they want to download.

exactly. and the only way to let people decide anything at all is to upload in original  uncompressed format

No, you're wrong. If you have it this way, people don't have a choice what they'd rather download because YOU are making that choice for them. Oh, let me guess ... it's for their own good, right? Because they are not mentally capable of making the "right" choice. If they don't know what's good for them, they must not be given a choice! Sorry, but this kind of thinking is causing me a heavy allergic reaction.

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 04, 2006, 00:42:08
you cannot undo the lossy compression once it's there = there's no decisions left to make, even if one wanted to.

You still don't understand, do you? This is not about flac OR mp3! One must not exclude the other! Why can't both formats exist here? No one will force you to download any mp3's. But it might make life a lot easier for people with slow connections, or people who think that flac would be a waste on audience recordings. Maybe I would even download certain audience recordings, but not if they are huge flac files.

If the downloads are properly labelled, everyone can download whatever he wants!

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 04, 2006, 00:42:08
by the way, that's why it always amazes me that people are actually paying for mp3s in some internet download stores. surely you should pay for the real thing, regardless of whether you go and buy a cd or buy a download - but paying for lossy files? hmm.

On this one, I'll have to agree with you. Unless the official download is considerably cheaper than the cd, it's absolutely crazy to pay for it. If it's roughly the same price, I'd rather buy the cd. Or download it somewhere else.

Quote from: lostflower4 on November 04, 2006, 00:56:12
So what are we to do? Make some rule that that only 192 kbps and up is allowed? Well, then I know what would happen. People would be recompressing their mp3's to a higher bitrate.

And now people are converting their mp3's to flac.

Quote from: lostflower4 on November 04, 2006, 00:56:12
As for lossless formats, there are usually ways to tell if something sourced from lossy files.

Of course, there are ways. But first you have to download the files ... sometimes even the entire show, if it's packed in an archive. Wouldn't you be pissed if you downloaded some 700 MB just to find out that it's actually just a converted mp3?

So, why not let people upload their mp3 shows and label them as such? No one will force you to download any of them!

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 04, 2006, 02:50:22

Quote from: lostflower4 on November 04, 2006, 00:56:12
So what are we to do? Make some rule that that only 192 kbps and up is allowed? Well, then I know what would happen. People would be recompressing their mp3's to a higher bitrate.

And now people are converting their mp3's to flac.

it has been suggested already that this will be monitored. of course it must be.

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 04, 2006, 02:50:22

Quote from: lostflower4 on November 04, 2006, 00:56:12
As for lossless formats, there are usually ways to tell if something sourced from lossy files.

Of course, there are ways. But first you have to download the files ... sometimes even the entire show, if it's packed in an archive. Wouldn't you be pissed if you downloaded some 700 MB just to find out that it's actually just a converted mp3?

So, why not let people upload their mp3 shows and label them as such? No one will force you to download any of them!

?
of course there's no point of downloading 700 MBs of crap - but the solution to avoid this would be to bring mp3s back?
hasn't it also been suggested that people need to post samples, and better make it a wav-sample so both the quality (whatever it is that people think this word means) and the lossless-ness can be checked from this at the same time.
this is a really easy method.

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 04, 2006, 02:50:22
So, why not let people upload their mp3 shows and label them as such? No one will force you to download any of them!

Maybe I'm sick and tired of shit like the following happening...

For those with a Dime account, go here:

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=115472


For those without, here's a mirror on my site:

http://www.imaginary-lemurs.com/archives/Dime/torrents-details.php.htm


Some of you may recognize those initials. Yes, a Cure taper too. Many of these guys are fed up with their shows spreading as mp3 and have chosen to just sit on them instead.

Now, I'm sure many of you will be tempted to say, "Well, f*ck them."

Ok... But then we all lose, don't we?

I prefer the mp3files, but if you want only flac, is ok for me

"Even I don't visit this site so often (at least not for download files), this new rule is great. Because everytime I remembered the site Curefans.com It always came to my mind "download mp3" and few messages, because you only would find one post where something interesting was written, and hundreds of reply of *thank you* messages, but not a real contribution to the forum.

Back to the proposition of the staff, it seems they wish to imitate another sites with the same idea. It's good to put quality over quantity. Personally, everytime I went to bootleg sites, I did prefer find files with FLAC, SHN and others loseless formats, instead of hundreds of hundreds mp3 files, where even you would find manipulated files"

I could not agree more with this post (translated from http://www.curefans.com/index.php/topic,3047.msg18481.html#msg18481 (http://www.curefans.com/index.php/topic,3047.msg18481.html#msg18481))

this disscussion starts to became pointless... the rule has been decided... so maybe the MP3 collectors can find a way to trade their MP3 shows... so people that preferred MP3 will look for the way of find MP3 shows... leechers will be on the net ever... so when somebody UNDERSTANDS and RESPECTS the RULES will do not have issues about the files format in the forum...

:rocker

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 04, 2006, 02:43:56

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 04, 2006, 00:42:08

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 03, 2006, 21:11:07
But we should also let people decide for themselves what they want to download.

exactly. and the only way to let people decide anything at all is to upload in original  uncompressed format

No, you're wrong. If you have it this way, people don't have a choice what they'd rather download because YOU are making that choice for them. Oh, let me guess ... it's for their own good, right? Because they are not mentally capable of making the "right" choice. If they don't know what's good for them, they must not be given a choice! Sorry, but this kind of thinking is causing me a heavy allergic reaction.

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 04, 2006, 00:42:08
you cannot undo the lossy compression once it's there = there's no decisions left to make, even if one wanted to.

You still don't understand, do you? This is not about flac OR mp3! One must not exclude the other! Why can't both formats exist here? No one will force you to download any mp3's. But it might make life a lot easier for people with slow connections, or people who think that flac would be a waste on audience recordings. Maybe I would even download certain audience recordings, but not if they are huge flac files.

If the downloads are properly labelled, everyone can download whatever he wants!

unfortunately, like darth blood says, i can see that this isn't going anywhere.
because come on, why are we having this discussion? because the starting point was that several point were made why the co-existent sharing in both mp3s and flac was considered problematic. these points have been explained several times by several different people on several different threads on this board, so i don't feel like repeating it here. please see these threads.
so, this was the starting point, the situation was considered problematic and reasons for this were explained - but still you're asking "why can't we have both?! one must not exclude the other!" 
?

and let's say we'd let the carefree co-existence continue: do you really think anything would change? that people would sudeenly start uploading "better quality" mp3s? i think this is wishful thinking - what would happen is that all these same ages old unlistenably bad and sad 128 kb/s (or lower) encoded file sets would just continue their neverending circulation (or peple might start re-encoding their 128 kb/s files to 320 kb/s and imagine they'd  somehow get better - like pointed out here earlier, no-one could ever tell the difference between those re-encoded messes. it would only mean the overall quality would go even lower than it was before. with lossless and lossy files this difference is at least possible to make, so it can be controlled).
and yes, people would also have good reason to keep saying "oh, audience recordings are just so bad" because surely those ancient files sets are truly horrible most of the time, i admit that: they are mostly unlistenable and only distorted grotesque images of what they originally were - they make me really sad.
and also, every now and then some fine new recording would suffer the same fate - possibly pissing of another taper so that even less quality recording got shared in the future.

so i'm afraid that as long as one doesn't want to see these starting points, the reasons why this decision was made, i'm afraid we're not getting much anywhere here and we're actually not really talking about the same thing/subject at all.
thus all this: "you still don't get it!" 

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 04, 2006, 02:43:56
If you have it this way, people don't have a choice what they'd rather download because YOU are making that choice for them. Oh, let me guess ... it's for their own good, right? Because they are not mentally capable of making the "right" choice. If they don't know what's good for them, they must not be given a choice! Sorry, but this kind of thinking is causing me a heavy allergic reaction.

well... before you start accusing anyone for making choices for others: please read the thread above. and also, riddle me this: what about all these situations where people carelessly encode straight to lossy in order to share, aren't they making choices for those other people out there who'd really like to get the recording in lossless format? what about that? and what's the difference: the difference is what i meant when i said that lossless is the only way to try to guarantee that you are not making choices for anyone else. because converting lossless to lossy will always remain possible, so people who only want mp3s for their ipods can still get what they want by downloading flac. but there's no way to make it work the other way round.
so if it gives you an allergic reaction: well i just can't start listing all those dozens of times i've felt disappointed and sick when i've known that this or that person had the lossless original in his/her hands but that the only way he/she chose to share was to put it up in some butchered form. to see that happening has made me sad, everytime.

Everyone has expressed their opinions so I think it's time to close this topic. Let's move on.

:rocker

David.

Quote from: dsanchez on November 03, 2006, 20:30:06
Everyone has expressed their opinions so I think it's time to close this topic. Let's move on.

:rocker

David.

I think we can leave it open... But let's not just keep talking about the same thing over and over and over. :roll:

Quote from: lostflower4 on November 03, 2006, 21:18:07
But let's not just keep talking about the same thing over and over and over. :roll:

Agreed. I think I have explained my thoughts about three times now, but it seems that people are still missing the whole point I was trying to make.

One last suggestion to anyone who has replied to me: Could you please READ my posts, and at least TRY to understand my words before you are quoting yourselves over and over again? It seems that you still don't have the slightest idea what I was talking about.

But, to quote an ancient proverb: The moderators are always right. Why would we lowly people need the freedom of choice, when the enlightened rulers of this forum are obviously far better qualified to make all the choices for us?

Resistance is futile!

No-one has the true.

However, something it's a real fact: upload mp3s without control have converted this forum in a download-upload-download-upload site with few discussions. Curefans.com was NOT created for this. So now, we hope with this decision to change the things a bit: more discussions than "download-upload-download-upload". Maybe is a good decision, maybe is not. Time will speak.

Cheers,

David.

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 03, 2006, 22:26:42

Quote from: lostflower4 on November 03, 2006, 21:18:07
But let's not just keep talking about the same thing over and over and over. :roll:

Agreed. I think I have explained my thoughts about three times now, but it seems that people are still missing the whole point I was trying to make.

One last suggestion to anyone who has replied to me: Could you please READ my posts, and at least TRY to understand my words before you are quoting yourselves over and over again? It seems that you still don't have the slightest idea what I was talking about.

But, to quote an ancient proverb: The moderators are always right. Why would we lowly people need the freedom of choice, when the enlightened rulers of this forum are obviously far better qualified to make all the choices for us?

Resistance is futile!

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 03, 2006, 22:26:42
One last suggestion to anyone who has replied to me: Could you please READ my posts, and at least TRY to understand my words before you are quoting yourselves over and over again? It seems that you still don't have the slightest idea what I was talking about.

no, you're wrong. actually i have a very clear idea what you are saying. but that doesn't mean i had to agree with you in everything. obviously we disagree on many aspects, but where's the drama?
and sure, i've been quoting myself but i'm not the only one: 

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 03, 2006, 22:26:42
I think I have explained my thoughts about three times now

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 03, 2006, 22:26:42
But, to quote an ancient proverb: The moderators are always right.

before you decide make this the good ol' "us or them": look around and see that maybe all the moderators haven't exactly agreed on this either. so maybe your "us or them" isn't quite justified. maybe i've been simply talking here as an individual, not as some sort of a "ruler" - as you seem to like to imagine things here are.

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 03, 2006, 22:26:42
Resistance is futile!

resistance? was it even meant to be a battle anyway?


my last comment - and i'm NOT talking as a moderator of anything:
you were actually right when you said this is not about mp3s or flac. the admins (NB: not myself) have stated repeatedly that the hub for downloads (whatever the format) was not their original idea for the whole thing here. that's the whole point. and let's imagine you'd be involved in running some "project" like this yourself and you'd suddenly notice it had turned into something else than you actually planned for and the got all unbalanced. wouldn't you like to sit down and think and do something about it? or should you just let it all drift and just try to bear it and try not to care, just let it all keep happening because someone else thought it's still quite ok? wouldn't you be responsible to do something?
and sure, whatever actions you took, you'd already know it's impossible to please everyone. sad? always is.
so let's leave it here.

bye folks.

Quote from: dsanchez on November 03, 2006, 22:34:37
No-one has the true.

However, something it's a real fact: upload mp3s without control have converted this forum in a download-upload-download-upload site with few discussions. Curefans.com was NOT created for this. So now, we hope with this decision to change the things a bit: more discussions than "download-upload-download-upload".

And you seriously believe that banning mp3's will change that? The only difference will be that people will now be up- und downloading flac files istead of mp3 files. There won't be any more discussions than before. People are already discussing on two other boards, maybe even more. There is only so much need for discussing things, and maybe people just don't want to have the same discussion on three boards at the same time?

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 04, 2006, 10:15:49And you seriously believe that banning mp3's will change that?

I believe it. It's certainly made you a much more active member. :lol:

Quote from: lostflower4 on November 04, 2006, 10:31:49
I believe it. It's certainly made you a much more active member. :lol:

:-D

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 03, 2006, 23:46:24

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 03, 2006, 22:26:42
Resistance is futile!

resistance? was it even meant to be a battle anyway?

You obviously didn't get the reference ... :roll:

Quote from: japanesebaby on November 03, 2006, 23:46:24
it's impossible to please everyone.

True. But it's possible to please the majority. Hint: Take a look at the poll results.

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 04, 2006, 10:56:35
True. But it's possible to please the majority. Hint: Take a look at the poll results.

what is a right way running a shop that maybe sell something? you ask as many people as possible what want to buy and then choose this item only because it means a lot of customers or you choose something you are interested to working with yourself and then ok have maybe less customers - but hey at least you like your job! which i think is valuable thing worth to choose because most people in this world seem to always only hate their jobs no?  ;)  i suppose both are possible choice but both are different choice: first focus on pleasing people (and making money) the second focus on doing something you feel is worth to do and devote your time. so people who have interest will come in and see and look around in your shop and stay and other people passing by. it is only matter of choose to focus when you are taking care of the house.

so i think this with internet board is no different: if we wish people running the forum for us then they must enjoy it themselves first no? someone can say first "no, they must please the majority!" but if you think of it, if put so much your effort into something then you have to enjoy it or it start to make no sense to you soon. yes it is definitely very difficult question and difficult choice to make here, but at least it is not just matter of majority wishes. board is not existing here without someone who decided to be interested to keep it up. i think we could try undestand it too.

like i say it is great that everyone here can say their opinion about this change but anyway it look like the change is here now and we could trying to see how it work and give a chance and not waste time only looking for more argument.
this is only my opinion when i follow conversation.

thanks

guess it's useless 2 spend more time on this topic.
the change's done, it can't b taken back, so..

we g2 accept it & move on..

we're still cure-fans after all..
we'll still exchange cure-stuff..

i definitely prefer mp3 but i can't do anythin now.

so, go on...

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 04, 2006, 10:56:35
True. But it's possible to please the majority. Hint: Take a look at the poll results.

According to the poll, half the people don't like it, and the other half like it or don't have an opinion.

But what about the other 900 members? I guess they're the silent ones who don't care and will just take whatever they can get? :?

Actually just 49,3% goes for mp3 meaning there is more than the half who agree with the idea or just does not care (watch the poll).

Let's see the stats at the end of november to see the first results we get with this decision.

Cheers

David.

Quote from: lostflower4 on November 05, 2006, 00:46:09

Quote from: Oso Blanco on November 04, 2006, 10:56:35
True. But it's possible to please the majority. Hint: Take a look at the poll results.

According to the poll, half the people don't like it, and the other half like it or don't have an opinion.

But what about the other 900 members? I guess they're the silent ones who don't care and will just take whatever they can get? :?

I think that if almost 50 % of people disagree the decision, this is not a good result... but finally I just respect the new rules and I never want talk about it.

Actually now is less than 50% (48%) for the people who goes for mp3...that means, people who wants flac or does not care is 50%+1, which is actually enough in any voting system  8)

Quote from: gioez on November 08, 2006, 10:00:29
I think that if almost 50 % of people disagree the decision, this is not a good result... but finally I just respect the new rules and I never want talk about it.

YEAH; democracy.
but do u even care about people who didnt elegate/vote.

for me, I also have many flac, but convert all of them to mp3.
ok. I think i hear your heart crashing...

im along time trade time before. I will not think again to get my concerts from flac, cause there is no need.

all my tapes are also given away. I do not need the orignal sources anymoe.

vnvrum