IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules

- No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!


- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.


- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.


- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Closed TopicStart new topic
Will you ask for a refund for the In rainbows download? If the audio q, If the audio quality or the format chosen is not to your liking willl
Will you ask for a refund for the In rainbows download? If the audio q
Will you ask for a refund for the In rainbows download?
Didn't pay, won't care. [ 31 ] ** [31.00%]
Ill take anything, [ 8 ] ** [8.00%]
average mp3 is good enough for me. [ 19 ] ** [19.00%]
no vorbis? no free speech, no quality, give me my money back [ 3 ] ** [3.00%]
lossless or bust, if its not a Flac lossless I wan't my cash back. [ 26 ] ** [26.00%]
they can keep the money I'll download it when it hits the stores [ 13 ] ** [13.00%]
Total Votes: 148
  
Anansi
post Oct 7 2007, 22:41
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 8-September 05
Member No.: 24387



their gesture is awesome and I pre-ordered it myself but I'm not gonna redeem some lousy mp3 encoding download . I prefer to either let them have the money and download a better version when it its the stores or just ask for a refund, whats your opinion on this?

This post has been edited by Anansi: Oct 7 2007, 22:43
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dave_K
post Oct 7 2007, 23:33
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 34
Joined: 26-September 07
Member No.: 47384



QUOTE (Anansi @ Oct 7 2007, 21:41) *
their gesture is awesome and I pre-ordered it myself but I'm not gonna redeem some lousy mp3 encoding download . I prefer to either let them have the money and download a better version when it its the stores or just ask for a refund, whats your opinion on this?


I'm curious to see exactly what downloaders get, that's why I'll be waiting until other people have downloaded and commented on it before I pay anything. It wouldn't surprise me to see CBR MP3s made with a mediocre encoder, rather than the LAME encoded VBR files people here would make. However I wouldn't mind that as long as the files don't sound too bad.

Radiohead have made a big deal about wanting to sell it as an album, rather than individual tracks, so that it's treated as a complete work and their art isn't compromised. Considering the care the band take with their sound I doubt they'll be selling files that sound terrible. I think poor sound due to loudness war mastering is more likely than poor quality due to the lossy encoding.

I think MP3 is a sensible choice for the download, lossless files would probably eat too much bandwidth, and other lossy formats don't have the hardware support. I'll definitely be disappointed if they use any form of DRM, but considering that they're allowing people pay £0.0 for it, DRM would seem utterly pointless.

As for asking for a refund, Radiohead haven't made any promises about the quality. I don't really see it as cause for a refund even if the quality is a bit disappointing.

I wonder what the legal issues are with sharing these files? Could I legally ignore Radiohead's site (considering the number of downloaders it isn't going to be fast, I'd be surprised if it stays up at all) and download the album using bittorrent?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
The Seeker
post Oct 8 2007, 00:02
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 102
Joined: 15-June 04
From: Buxton, UK
Member No.: 14694



QUOTE (Anansi @ Oct 7 2007, 22:41) *
I prefer to either let them have the money and download a better version when it its the stores or just ask for a refund, whats your opinion on this?


I'm not that petty.

Radiohead have put forth an amazing deal; you can download the album for nothing if you like, the choice is ahead of you to buy the physical album if you see fit. Pristine sound quality does not concern me, I'm more interested in the material and the prospect of repeated listening etc.

This post has been edited by The Seeker: Oct 8 2007, 00:04


--------------------
Music washes away from the soul the dust of everyday life.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Anansi
post Oct 8 2007, 00:08
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 8-September 05
Member No.: 24387



QUOTE (Dave_K @ Oct 7 2007, 16:33) *
As for asking for a refund, Radiohead haven't made any promises about the quality. I don't really see it as cause for a refund even if the quality is a bit disappointing.

I wonder what the legal issues are with sharing these files? Could I legally ignore Radiohead's site (considering the number of downloaders it isn't going to be fast, I'd be surprised if it stays up at all) and download the album using bittorrent?


simple, I won't redeem the coupon if I see people complaining about the quality, in fact I believe I'll stop over here to check that out before I decide to redeem my code, so its more of case of returning an unused item than demanding a refund, also has for mp3 being a sensible choice you should bear in mind that its not really legal for most linux users or any open-source user to download an mp3 player since no one payed thompson and fhg the proper licenses so they should at least offer people the choice of a patent free format, also rockbox is runnning on pretty much anything these days so its really not that hard and it would be good to make people aware that their shiny new ipod is a vendor lock-in festival.

And flac has almost universal support except for the die-hard monopolists but anyone with a computer can transcode a flac file to their favorite lossy format the way they see fit.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fuchal
post Oct 8 2007, 00:14
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 119
Joined: 21-July 04
Member No.: 15638



It's going to be mp3. There is no other format that makes sense to give to thousands to millions of people.

Most people don't even know what FLAC is, and especially not what to do with it.

This post has been edited by Fuchal: Oct 8 2007, 00:14
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
dngrCharlie
post Oct 8 2007, 01:03
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 3
Joined: 28-April 05
Member No.: 21746



Is it possible that the download will be CD Audio files (like Rhapsody does)? You would then have to burn them to a CD for it to work.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Anansi
post Oct 8 2007, 09:10
Post #7





Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 8-September 05
Member No.: 24387



QUOTE (Fuchal @ Oct 7 2007, 17:14) *
It's going to be mp3. There is no other format that makes sense to give to thousands to millions of people.

Most people don't even know what FLAC is, and especially not what to do with it.


they can be explained in a single sentence, then pop the flac into nero/lame/itunes, even if in the rare chance they don't have the codecs that too can be packed in with the rest of the download as its microscopic compared to the album, also they could offer a vorbis option, same server load since they seem to be going for a "one user, one download" and actually reduce the server workload or adding quality by doing that. biggrin.gif

This post has been edited by Anansi: Oct 8 2007, 09:11
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Oct 8 2007, 09:15
Post #8





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



My guess will be 320 CBR MP3. FLAC would be a real bonus.

The idea that people may ask for a refund amuses me. I don't know what the deal is with pre-ordering something when you don't really know what it is. If you're that concerned then I would suggest not pre-ordering. I find it hard to believe that people pre-ordered on the assumption that it would be FLAC and will ask for a refund if not; you may get lucky, but I severly doubt it.

On a related note, I have a topic in which I ask people to state how much they are willing to pay for the download here.


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
evereux
post Oct 8 2007, 10:58
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 907
Joined: 9-February 02
From: Cheshire, UK
Member No.: 1296



QUOTE
lossless or bust, if its not a Flac lossless I wan't my cash back.

Who on earth is going to be parting with their money with expectation it's to be lossless? Those people don't deserve a refund.

I've pre-ordered, paying £2 and will be buying the CD when it's released. I'll not be asking for a refund. blink.gif


--------------------
daefeatures.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SebastianG
post Oct 8 2007, 12:29
Post #10





Group: Developer
Posts: 1317
Joined: 20-March 04
From: Göttingen (DE)
Member No.: 12875



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Oct 8 2007, 10:15) *
... pre-ordering something when you don't really know what it is.

That's the problem with this offer. You have to be a Radiohead fan, I guess. For someone like me who occasionally likes to listen to some Radiohead tracks but doesn't like all of'em it's not an option because I not only don't know what quality to expect ("bitrate-wise") but also havn't heard a single note. Of course, I could -- as a precautionary measure -- pre-order the album at a low price. But this might also send the wrong message. I'd be glad to pay a price I think is appropriate but without knowing what it is I get this is impossible.

Cheers!
SG

This post has been edited by SebastianG: Oct 8 2007, 12:31
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Oct 8 2007, 13:55
Post #11





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



I assume that we will know the format and quality in a couple of days' time. At that time I will decide what I feel is the appropriate price, although I am considering £4-5 at the moment. Of course, this doesn't solve the problem of pre-listening. Perhaps fans will have to download via P2P to pre-listen and not distort their statistics... (although I presume that this would still be considered breach of copyright).

That said, I have been involved in an argument in another forum, where many people seem to believe that we should not be paying for the download - on the general assumption that Radiohead will gain a larger fanbase and recoup more money from back-sales and concerts. This is something I was hoping may get discussed in my thread. I have been arguing (in that forum) that consumers are proving that Radiohead's faith in their fans is misplaced, and risk this model failing for future bands; however I can't help but conceed that they may have a valid point. Do Radiohead want you to play fair, and pay what you see is a fair price, or do they really not care if you pay or not, and are happy with the publicity, and the knowledge that their album is reaching more users - eventually gaining them a higher return. This is a bit OT for this thread, but I would be delighted if members would discuss this in the thread that I created, as I'm interested to hear the opinions of yourselves on the subject.

This post has been edited by Synthetic Soul: Oct 8 2007, 13:59


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
xmixahlx
post Oct 8 2007, 18:02
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 1394
Joined: 20-December 01
From: seattle
Member No.: 693



dude. just pay them for the mp3 download (if you want it). then buy the record.

i'm not seeing the huge complication here...


--------------------
RareWares/Debian :: http://www.rarewares.org/debian.html
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Anansi
post Oct 9 2007, 22:58
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 8-September 05
Member No.: 24387



QUOTE
THANK YOU FOR ORDERING IN RAINBOWS. THIS IS AN UPDATE.

YOUR UNIQUE ACTIVATION CODE(S) WILL BE SENT OUT TOMORROW MORNING (UK TIME). THIS WILL TAKE YOU STRAIGHT TO THE DOWNLOAD AREA.

HERE IS SOME INFORMATION ABOUT THE DOWNLOAD:

THE ALBUM WILL COME AS A 48.4MB ZIP FILE CONTAINING 10 X 160KBPS DRM FREE MP3s.

MOST COMPUTERS NOW HAVE ZIP SOFTWARE AS PART OF THE OPERATING SYSTEM; IF YOUR COMPUTER DOES NOT, YOU NEED TO GET WINZIP OR ZIPIT INSTALLED PRIOR.

YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THEM HERE:

PC: http://www.winzip.com/
MAC: http://www.maczipit.com/

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR PROBLEMS DOWNLOADING YOUR FILE, PLEASE CONTACT OUR DOWNLOAD CUSTOMER SERVICE TEAM AT
downloadinrainbows@waste.uk.com

160 CBR MP3 ??? what the hell thats cheap...

Hell I mailed them asking for 160KBPS vorbis instead, hell -q5 vorbis should keep it in the same size range maybe even save them some traffic
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Bourne
post Oct 10 2007, 00:22
Post #14





Group: Banned
Posts: 735
Joined: 19-March 06
Member No.: 28599



160 kbps CBR mp3...

plain clear that their focus is on the "DISCBOX" for £40.00

thank God I have never liked Radiohead.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
/mnt
post Oct 10 2007, 00:44
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 697
Joined: 22-April 06
Member No.: 29877



160kbps, thats pretty lame and i thought Nine Inch Nails were bad with bitrates when they leaked some of their new tracks online with 320kbps Stero that was encoded on iTunes.

Also if the album is encoded by a Fhg encoder then you will be SOL to get proper gapless.

This post has been edited by /mnt: Oct 10 2007, 00:46


--------------------
"I never thought I'd see this much candy in one mission!"
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Oct 10 2007, 08:59
Post #16





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



Mr Questionman says the files are LAME 3.93.

Here's the output from metamp3 --info:

CODE
File: 01 - Radiohead - 15 Step.MP3
   Type                    : mpeg 1 layer III
   Mode                    : joint stereo
   Frequency               : 44100 Hz
   Frames                  : 9081
   Length                  : 00:03:57
   Max. Reservoir          : 507
   Av. Reservoir           : 299
   Emphasis                : none
   Scalefac                : 5.9%
   Bad Last Frame          : no
   Encoder                 : Lame 3.93

   Bitrate (average)       : 160
   -----------------------------------------------------------
   160     ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||      100.0%
   -----------------------------------------------------------
Lame Header             : No


ID3v1.1 tags:

   Title  : 15 Step
   Artist : Radiohead
   Album  : In Rainbows
   Year   : 2007
   Track  : 1

ID3v2.3 tags:

   TIT2:
   TALB:
   TSRC:
   TCOP:
   TDRC: 2007
   TRCK: 1
   TPOS: 0/0
   TPE1:


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dologan
post Oct 10 2007, 09:10
Post #17





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 478
Joined: 22-November 01
From: United Kingdom
Member No.: 519



Pretty lame... literally. Just got my download and Mr QuestionMan says it's encoded with LAME 3.93 CBR dry.gif
Can't say I am not somewhat disappointed and they sure as hell could have done better than that. Nevertheless, I think it was quite unrealistic to expect lossless, to be honest, and way too many people would probably have been stumped by FLAC (Just imagine how much "WTF, I can't play it on iTunes!!!" flak they would have got in return tongue.gif); so I think MP3 was the way to go... But heck, couldn't they at least use the latest LAME version and some VBR??
In any case, asking for the money back is cheap, lame and pedant, IMHO. Their progressive approach deserves to be applauded for the blow it deals to the recording industry and even if I had known what I would be getting I would still have paid to download the album (although probably not as much as I did...)

This post has been edited by Dologan: Oct 10 2007, 09:21
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
herbslolo
post Oct 10 2007, 09:29
Post #18





Group: Members
Posts: 1
Joined: 14-June 07
Member No.: 44353



QUOTE (Dologan @ Oct 10 2007, 02:10) *
In any case, asking for the money back is cheap, lame and pedant, IMHO. Their progressive approach deserves to be applauded for the blow it deals to the recording industry and even if I had known what I would be getting I would still have paid to download the album (although probably not as much as I did...)


Yes - you're right. I paid, what i thought would be a fair price for the CD, just to support the idea. - This is the first time a major band does something like this, and although Magnatune would have been my preferred way of distribution, i still love them for not treating me like a criminal.

I won't feel guilty downloading the album again in better quality, though.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Canar
post Oct 10 2007, 09:36
Post #19





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3348
Joined: 26-July 02
From: princegeorge.ca
Member No.: 2796



Another artist trying to get it and failing miserably. These sorts of things serve as an acid test for just how much an artist cares about the quality of their released material. Apparently, Radiohead cares about DRM-free downloads exactly to the magnitude of the quality of CBR 160kbps LAME 3.93 MP3s. Not even VBR, much less AAC. Might as well be releasing with 128kbps CBR old-Xing. When an artist releases a Musepack Q5 release, then I'll take notice (I guess Vorbis ~Q6 works too, as guruboolez thinks it sounds better than MPCq5).

I see no evidence that this is anything but a publicity scam and nothing else from a band that hasn't been all that relevant in years.

These are just my opinions. The token thought is nice. The execution is somewhat laughable though.


--------------------
You cannot ABX the rustling of jimmies.
No mouse? No problem.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Oct 10 2007, 09:55
Post #20





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



You can't seriously believe that artists are going to provide Vorbis or Musepack downloads over MP3?

MP3 can be played by almost anything. I know Vorbis has some hardware support, but Musepack? Even AAC is limiting.

Saying that they may as well have used 128kbps Xing is a little melodramatic.

If it was 320kbps MP3 you could possibly transcode, and most likely be happy(-ish). That said, as per other arguments about download bitrate, 320kbps is not a sensible setting to dump directly to DAP - you're hitting middle ground there again.

I was a bit surprised by 160kbps, but at least it is a sensible DAP setting. I would also assume that 160kbps CBR will be perfectly adequate for many, many people.

This post has been edited by Synthetic Soul: Oct 10 2007, 10:01


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Remedial Sound
post Oct 10 2007, 09:57
Post #21





Group: Members
Posts: 504
Joined: 5-January 06
From: Dublin
Member No.: 26898



Seriously, for what they're doing 160kbps CBR is fine. Unless you can ABX it with the original (when the actual CD comes out), then there's nothing to complain about, right?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
twostar
post Oct 10 2007, 10:29
Post #22





Group: Members
Posts: 487
Joined: 5-August 02
From: Manila
Member No.: 2939



people should start listening to the music and not the quality of the files.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Anansi
post Oct 10 2007, 11:09
Post #23





Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 8-September 05
Member No.: 24387



most people that care about the quality are also most likely to be the ones that actually bothered to pay and encourage them, its a bit of a backstab altough Its intencional I really don't think they know any better and left this up to their merchandising company.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Synthetic Soul
post Oct 10 2007, 11:22
Post #24





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4887
Joined: 12-August 04
From: Exeter, UK
Member No.: 16217



I would say to anyone complaining: why pay for something when you don't know what it is? You really have no-one else to blame.

Calling this a "backstabbing" move is a little unfair.

I personally believe that many (most) people who payed will be perfectly happy with the quality.

As I've said before: I'm a little surprised by 160kbps, but anyone expecting FLAC, AAC, Vorbis or Musepack, and payed on that assumption, were just away with the faries.


--------------------
I'm on a horse.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
evereux
post Oct 10 2007, 11:35
Post #25





Group: Members
Posts: 907
Joined: 9-February 02
From: Cheshire, UK
Member No.: 1296



QUOTE (Synthetic Soul @ Oct 10 2007, 11:22) *
As I've said before: I'm a little surprised by 160kbps, but anyone expecting FLAC, AAC, Vorbis or Musepack, and payed on that assumption, were just away with the faries.


Absoloutely.

Musepack? The drama is too funny.

I'm a little dissappointed that the release isn't VBR but hey, so what, the CD will be released and I'll make my own MP3s. This is exactly why I chose to only pay a couple of £'s.

I think we're loosing site of what a great thing Radiohead have done here and rumours are that Oasis and Jamiroquai are following suite in a similar fashion. The music industry will be slowly crapping thier pants.


--------------------
daefeatures.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th July 2014 - 14:04