www.trackitdown.net

I think it would be better if the tracks you but were uncompressed .wavs. That way you would be getting the best possible quality in a format that is unavailable anywhere else.
 
bit unrealistic for downloads tho mate.. yr talkin 80mb per tune for a 16bit version ...

Andrew
 
andrew said:
:no:

won't be a very popular subject i suppose. why pay for something when u can have it for free? :jump:
Click to expand...

I guess people would sooner buy a cd than download it if they have to pay for it... they can download it for free anyway...

Buy your cd's people :!:
 
not so sure tbh. if people download tunes that they like they can put their own killer compilations together instead of being stuck with the choices of us record execs.

it's about more choice , more freedom really

Andrew
 
you can make killer compilations true and you don't have to pay £10 for a cd with only 2 good tracks on (Beatport 2 imo). however why pay for poor quality sounds like mp3 like you say, when you can download it. surely a record label would benefit financially if they put highest quality .wav files on a website available to buy as well as making cd's.

buying mp3 is a bit of a con because you are getting a compressed tune, where's the bass and the overall richness in the sound?

buy .wav, embrace music downloads, it makes sense (for me ;) )
 
Exactly Drat, I would pay for a .wav but not mp3.
Also I would think that anyone mixing would would pay for .wav quaility as well.
 
I'm with the general consensus to get .wav files available for download. 80MB isn't too bad to download if you've got access to a T1 pipe or better - something that's becoming increasingly common in workplaces.

I for one would be very happy to purchase some .wavs if the right tunes became available.

Another opion might be for people to select the .wav tunes they want, build a 'virtual' CD album. Then recieve the files, burnt to a CD, in the post the next day. Compromise?
 
80MB is nothing for most plp to download these days when you consider that many naughty plp are more than happy to download complete movies which are far more than 80MB. I would rather have a Wav for my money than I would an MP3 with jangaly fluffl sounding highs. Hats that go flut flut flut. Yukkie poo poos.
 
Monkey Do said:
The problem with offering .wav for download is that bandwidth costs for the service would be so high that you'd end up paying about a tenner per track.
Click to expand...
Well what if some bright spark set up a P2P pay type service? Those who had already downloaded tracks would seed the tracks also. It could work so that you download the software and open an account. Only files originally purchased from the site index would be available in the software and the more you seeded you could build up tokens off you next download price. That’s my idea that it.
 
*edited*
 
LEARN ABOUT FLAC LEARN ABOUT FLAC LEARN ABOUT FLAC.

This is exactly the type of thing it's meant for. It's mathematically lossless so if you want wavs (or your software doesn't yet support FLAC) you can save time downloading and get EXACTLY the same file...

But yeah, 80MiB is fuck all nowadays. Takes me less than a minute.
 
I think they offer WAVs as well (on some stuff at least) for a little bit more cash.

Does anyone know of any other sites that sell psy MP3s?

Rolo.
 
Wolo said:
I think they offer WAVs as well (on some stuff at least) for a little bit more cash.

Does anyone know of any other sites that sell psy MP3s?

Rolo.
Click to expand...

The iboga site ( iboga.dk ) sells most of their tunes on mp3, which is great if you just want one or two tracks off a compilation. It doesn't make much difference with Iboga, though, because I tend to want all of them. ,
 
yep - I would d/l and pay for .wavs if I had the opportunity :), and broadband :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top