View Full Version : networks with low-medium quality music albums
ABC123666
January 25th, 2005, 03:08 AM
I like downloading music albums of BT. But the files are allways encoded at 192-300somethingkb which means it take smore than a little time. Now I'm not an audio fine and I probably couldnt notice the different between a 96k mp3 and a 320k one. Are thier any networks/bt sites which have a good amound of music albums available in 96-320k mp3's?
tackdaddy
January 25th, 2005, 03:19 AM
well dude sorry but 96kbps sucks for quality.i get mine at least at 192kbps
DampCold
January 25th, 2005, 03:21 AM
I think you would notice the difference. I wouldn't go lower then 160kbs and definitely not lower then 128k. It depends on the type of music you are looking for. Some P2P tend to cater to a specific set of genres.
[EDIT] I don't get anything lower then 192kbs personally.
ABC123666
January 25th, 2005, 03:44 AM
Ah shit wrong board. Could someome please move it to somewhere more appropriate?
I listen to everything from rock to trance and rnb. I listen to music mainly on my dodgy 2.0 speaker that I dont plan on replacing due to lack of space for anything decent. SO for that reasion I probably dont notice much difference at lower bit rates.
shawners
January 25th, 2005, 06:01 AM
TRUST ME!!! you would notice a 96kbs file.. They are without adoubt the worst. If you really want great music and thats not that bad, stick with BT.. If you want individual songs at 128.. There is kazaa. BT people will include covers, m3u playlist, all track listings and possibly bonus. IF YOU use BIt tornaodo or others, you can choose which songs to download, and what to download. Its in the help guide.
the great one
January 25th, 2005, 06:10 AM
Yeah,160kbps is the lowest I would go.
ferrarimodena360
January 25th, 2005, 06:38 AM
someone answer the damn question
you will hardly find not never find files below 192 kbps or VBR...on torrent
you can try dc++ the best place to download complete albums,
otherwise ares and shareaza are good to download low bitrate files, but not good for albums
ducttapeBigSexy
January 25th, 2005, 07:00 AM
Why not just download the high quality version (which is gonna be much easier to find then a low quality version) and just take it down to 96 kb/sec with dbpoweramp or something similar (www.dbpoweramp.com (http://www.dbpoweramp.com))
However, once again, I do have to recommend not going beneath 160 kb/sec - and if you do, (this will probably be the only time you'll hear this), please don't share those files. We really don't need low quality rips on p2p networks (one of the main reason why so many people have left Kazaa).
Otherwise, why not try looking for WMAs or OGGs - they're gonna be at a lower bitrate (which means lower size) and still have good quality (usually better than mp3). Or, just download the high quality mp3 and convert it to a smaller file (like a WMA or OGG). You will suffer some quality loss, but you've already said it's not that big of deal.
EDIT: Ok, I didn't read your post too carefully (cut me some slack - I just got up like 10 minutes ago!), but, my suggestions aren't really going to help you unless you're looking to save hard drive space.
Crazy Horse
January 25th, 2005, 10:23 AM
You might try going here :http://www.ubershare.com/
ferrarimodena360
January 25th, 2005, 10:59 AM
You might try going here :http://www.ubershare.com/
was he not askin bout LOW QUALITY FILES
this guy needs stuff thats round 128kbps
Crazy Horse
January 25th, 2005, 11:48 AM
was he not askin bout LOW QUALITY FILES
this guy needs stuff thats round 128kbps
You are correct. Although he/she was asking about albums and 96-320. This person may still find what they are looking for there.......or not.
ferrarimodena360
January 25th, 2005, 09:18 PM
You are correct. Although he/she was asking about albums and 96-320. This person may still find what they are looking for there.......or not.
the great one speaks
shawners
January 25th, 2005, 09:23 PM
or not. .. =)
I would honestly hate for everyone to go down in quality and not up.. Speeds are better, hard drives are bigger, computers are faster.. Its now FLAC and APE =)
Chrono_trigger_fan
January 25th, 2005, 11:52 PM
128 is good.i mean on big speakers playing a really loud rap song. u really cant tell a difference. 128 is pefectly fine. unless ur listening to ur music on headphones orsome really cheap ass $20 speakres. go with 128. i dont know any one specific service where u can find them the most... probbaly gnutella. id say kazaa but to many fakes.
ABC123666
January 26th, 2005, 03:59 AM
Why not just download the high quality version (which is gonna be much easier to find then a low quality version) and just take it down to 96 kb/sec with dbpoweramp or something similar (www.dbpoweramp.com)
The reason I want somewhere to dl low quality vids is because of the speed (or lack) of my net conection.
Anyone have any Idea I can dl lower quality albums? Even somewhere that had alot of 160Kb files would be good.
infringer
January 26th, 2005, 06:30 PM
One way to do it is rip them off of shout cast servers requires a little time and effort but works.
Kazaa seems to be host to many 128kb songs as well... requires a bit of work to find a song that aint fake.
Though I would almost always like my music at 192 as well I would like to actually see someone do a test and have two seperate files for download one that was ripped at 160k cbr, and 128k and reencoded to 192kb cbr and the other one ripped directly to 192 cbr and see who could really tell the differnce I have heard of many people claim there be a big differnce but I really wonder how well the human ear is interperting this rather then the mind and what it sees as popular.
I'd like to see the folks that put the song in the right spot... I would be supprised if a majority of the people got it right.
-infringer-
rainbowdemon
January 26th, 2005, 06:49 PM
The absolute bare minimum is 128!!