Allee Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 Did anyone here use WINMX for downloading music from the internet? When it went down last year I stopped using it. I reconnected on the patched network last month but it's useless, the file transfer is incredibly slow and crashes all the time. What does everyone use to download? I've had LImewire and Ares suggested to me as being pretty good for mainstream stuff. Any other thoughts? I did contemplate going legal and using Napster.ca, but their catalogue doens't seem to run much past current top 40, and I don't download enough to justify $15 per month... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nekdut Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 If you're going to pay, just go with iTunes. A little pricey, but at least its legal. Allofmp3.com is another pay service but its downright cheap, as low as $0.08 a song and they have a pretty solid collection. Questionable legality though ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allee Posted August 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 I thought ITunes was for IPod's only? (I'm showing what a tech dropout I am now) ... My somewhat ageing MP3 player is a pre-IPod Creative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derf Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 I haven't downlaoded any mp3 for a few years, so I'm out of the loop, but I've read on the pay services. iTunes seems ok, but it's proprietary format, you can read the files on your computer, but not on any other mp3 player than an iPod. All other sites use Windows Media. Be very careful, because with some services, you can't listen to the songs once you've stopped you subscription. All songs from all services (except eMusic) contain DRM (Digital Rights Management), so you are limited with what you do with the music you buy. There are some tools for iTunes format (called hymn), but I don't know of any for Windows Media (that does not degrade the files). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjl Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 Yeah, iTunes-purchased songs can only be played on iTunes and on an iPod, until those JHymn guys can crack the new fairplay codes, or unless you burn a CD from the iTunes-purchased AAC and then rerip the CD (or some other crappy lossy conversion) It is a source of huge frustration to me, as it means I can't play songs I own over my wireless music setup at home. Bastards. These days I buy off of iTunes and then download the same songs via eMule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedzilla Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 If you're going to pay, just go with iTunes. A little pricey, but at least its legal.Allofmp3.com is another pay service but its downright cheap, as low as $0.08 a song and they have a pretty solid collection. Questionable legality though ;) AllofMP3.com is the way to go (at least until they get shut down). Buy an entire CD for $1.50-$2.00 iTunes sucks. I'd have no problem paying a buck a song if I could just have it in an MP3 format from the beginning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 itunes isnt the only one though... seems odd to pay for something that the money isnt going to the rightful owners. www.beatport.com www.addictech.com two Ive used...mainly dance music though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 Limewire lights up my spyware detector. yeah, iTunes does require you to drink the Apple kool-aid, but it works. And if you have an AirPort in the house, you can broadcast your tunes to your stereo. Just remember - mp3's and their ilk are crap for anything remotely resembling somewhat serious listening. Their only use is for walkman-type applications. CDs are still the only way to get audiophile quality digital music. And the retrogrouches would argue only vinyl delivers audiophile quality... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 I have my CD collection ripped to Ogg (Q6 which is a VBR about 180k) and things sound just FINE. Tends to sound a little bass heavy, and a little brash when real loud, but hell... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skatha Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 Vinyl really is the only way to hear the whole spectrum of sound for a recording. The digital system compresses both the high and low end frequencies-BUT, as I told my dad in our big CD v. LP argument a few years ago, you wear off the higher frequencies within 2 or 3 plays with an LP..hence recording to casette tapes with the first play.... I have about 250 LPs-most I have only played once My dad is a big classical fan and has even more LPs of classical music-most not cared for correctly.... Plastic wrap off paper liner in place stored vertically I opted for Napster for loading up my Creative Zen... On it is "Never been to Spain" by Three Dog Night "It Don't Matter to Me" by Bread "A Common Disaster" by the Cowboy Junkies "Angel" by Fleetwood Mac Not your typical top 40 fare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 skatha Im sorry for correcting you, but...vinyl recordings are not full spectrum reproductions either. Know what RIAA EQ is? CDs are 16bit/44k recordings, which is technically the highest we can hear according to ...Nyquist Theorem? something like that...anyway vinyl, when recorded, is heavily EQ'd to keep the grooves under control, then that same EQ is applied to all phono preamps. http://stereos.about.com/od/gtgtturntables/a/riaa_eq.htm you want good digital? 24/96 .wav. Some are even doing 24/192 now. Ive done a lot of digital audio in the past, and still thought 16/44 was plenty sufficient. gosh, another tangent. I suck. back OT...Ive always thought that 192k MP3s were perfectly suitable for listening, but I have never, ever, not even once, downloaded something illegitimately. Having tried to sell my own music in the past, I can not morally do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allee Posted August 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 D-Sub, downloading music from the internet for your own personal use is not illegal in Canada, as proven by court case... People have some interesting takes on downloading. For myself, I have a rule that if I like more than 3 songs on an album, I'll buy it. Otherwise if I can just download the one or two songs I like, I will. I also use it to trial stuff that I certainly wouldn't buy. Sometimes I end up keeping it, more often that not I junk it. It's actually a good way for artists to "spread the word" ... some of the radio station options like Pandora, etc, are great. 192Kbps does fine for me. I only use it to relieve the monotony on long trips in cars and planes, or as background when I work around the house. I'm hardly an audiophile so as long as it sounds OK on a car stereo, that's all I care about. Jack, I was warned that Limewire was a virus nest. But the AllMP3's looks really good and has the older stuff that I'm after ... I'll give that a spin tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjl Posted August 17, 2006 Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 How is downloading music for your personal use not illegal in Canada? Seems like it's just theft to me... I believe in following the spirit of the law, but not necessarily the rule of law. If I buy songs off iTunes and then own them, but can't play it on my non-Apple wireless system, I'll "illegally" download them. If I bought a CD once but lost it, I'll happily download the songs again. If I download songs and decide I like them, I'll buy the CD, though I may never take the plastic wrap off. I agree in principle with DSub, possibly because I also work in media. I think illegally downloading music is no different from walking into a store and stealing a bag of candy or a laptop computer, except that the sum total of the work and effort that went into creating the music or movies happens to be easily stored in digital format. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allee Posted August 17, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2006 How is downloading music for your personal use not illegal in Canada? Seems like it's just theft to me... Dunno, ask the judge. But that was the ruling thar came down a couple of years ago. The RIAA was a little pi$$ed. But it means for me, as a Canadian resident, it's legal ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 Allee its not about legality to me. I dont believe in most laws anyway. But, if I create something, I own it. Whether or not I should receive compensation for that ownership is debatable, no doubt. if I sounded like I was condemning, I really wasnt. I dont agree with getting things for free that are otherwise for sale. To me it seems cut and dried. Agian, not from a legal standpoint but from a moral one. Yes, there is the exposure argument. Ive heard every. single. argument. Been over this whole thing time and time again. yes, it is a great way to preview. I remember when Borders used to let you listen to CDs first. I bought SO many I wouldnt have, and avoided buying many that I might have. anyway...if product a is for sale legitimately and ethically with correct ownership, it seems to me that any effort to circumvent a sale is immoral in a capitalist society. you live in canada. youre not even bound by the laws of capitalism ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeW Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 Allee, welcome back from New Zealand. And FWIW, everybody, I do myrhapshody. Does me good. Been going legit since a friend of mine got busted for ring of warez stuffs. Been a reality wake up call, and went legit all the way since then. Oh yea, my mp3 player's a samsung with the capacity to do videos. YH-999 model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 I have my CD collection ripped to Ogg (Q6 which is a VBR about 180k) and things sound just FINE. Tends to sound a little bass heavy, and a little brash when real loud, but hell... Played through a real system, they will sound like crap when compared to the original. Disk space is cheap. Your music collection is priceless. Rip everything using lossless compression, then make 128kbps "portable" copies from those for your mp3 player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 sorry jack, but youre mistaken. I've A/B'd on a decent home stereo, and on my studio setup where I spend many many hours and know the sound intimately, and the .ogg format does not sound like crap. and "lossless compression" is an oxymoron. Audio compression removes information, always. I think FLAC and AAC just use a formula to do the removal, and the opposite to "put it back" at the end as for home listening...CDs. The ripping is just for portable anyway. Car, riding (well, never have actually) exercise etc. Nice having my entire collection on a 60GB player with TONS of space left over! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjl Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 "lossless compression" is an oxymoron. Audio compression removes information, always. That is not true - there are compression schemes which do not remove information (e.g. FLAC, ALAC). It's just that people tend to use lossy compression instead for the much smaller filesizes, and since most people (like me) can't tell the difference anyways, or lack the ultra audiophile equipment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derf Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 I use ogg (-q5) and flac for my CD's. I haven't tried them on my stereo, but it sounds good on my computer speakers. To have them sound good on my stereo, I would need a better computer setup: right now I have a PIII, a Maxtor/Promise ATA133 card (because of my large drive) and an Ensoniq AudioPCI. I suspect that the traffic on the PCI bus from the ATA card interferes with the sound card, making it jump/stutter. Speaking of hi-fi sound on a computer, anybody using an M-Audio sound card? From what I have heard, Audigy is Lo-Fi compared to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derf Posted August 18, 2006 Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 I opted for Napster for loading up my Creative Zen... I hope you read the fine prints saying, and I quote,: It is necessary to maintain a Napster subscription in order to continue access to songs downloaded through the Napster service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allee Posted August 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 18, 2006 I hope you read the fine prints,: You can use Napster Light to buy and keep stuff. You can do lots of cool stuff on Napster and Napster-to-Go but you do need the subscription key ... I can't use to-Go because I'm still running Win2000 (old school!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 That is not true - there are compression schemes which do not remove information (e.g. FLAC, ALAC). It's just that people tend to use lossy compression instead for the much smaller filesizes, and since most people (like me) can't tell the difference anyways, or lack the ultra audiophile equipment. compression = loss. Explain how something can become smaller without removing information? Im pretty sure that FLAC simply uses an algorithm to remove data, and the same algorithm to put it back when playing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjl Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 compression = loss. Explain how something can become smaller without removing information? Compression is not necessarily loss. you say: "5555555555" I say: "10 5s" you say: "123451234543212345" I say: "a=12345:aa432a" Same exact information, but I saved you a few characters in both cases. I'm not sure exactly how audio compression works, but in general the way compression works is by taking common patterns in the data and replacing them with smaller tokens that your decoding algorithm knows how to expand back again. There are, of course, much more exotic methods out there, but the key idea is that you may have made the data smaller, but you have not lost information. You can also tailor the algorithms to the particular kind of data. e.g. if you replaced the string "terror" with "\A" and the string "JonBenet Ramsey" with "\B" you could probably reduce the size of all the news websites by 80-90% ;) Im pretty sure that FLAC simply uses an algorithm to remove data, and the same algorithm to put it back when playing That's exactly right, except that you should use the word "encode" instead of "remove" - FLAC and other lossless compression algorithms encode data into smaller, more efficient formats in a reversable way such that the decoder (your media player) can reproduce the exact data. You seem to use computers a fair bit; the ZIP compressor is lossless - otherwise none of your programs would run when you decompressed them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjl Posted August 20, 2006 Report Share Posted August 20, 2006 Oh, hey, some interesting reading here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless_compression http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Lossless_Audio_Codec Apparently FLAC is definitely more exotic - prediction to guess at upcoming samples from the last few samples and then storing the difference between the guess and the real sample? I have no idea - I have now reached the end of my fakey hand-wavey BS. But definitely some interesting reading off of those articles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.