GEN
Active topics
  1. Originally posted by yeah:Using the (RED) platform would make sense then.
    If they decide to do a digital only release, they better use a lossless format...


    That's why I said AmazonMP3. It's not exactly lossless (256Kbps MP3), but better than the 128Kbps iTunes gives you. Lossless (FLAC, rather than WAV or ALAC) would be the way to go, and U2 would be stupid to not go lossless, but so many people are buying digital now, they don't care for files that size, as long as they hear the 80% audio loss. It's great to have an album you can download in 10 minutes, but you get terrible sound as a result.

    I wonder if Live Nation will distribute the CD through the official website....working with new technology partners. Apparently U2 are going DRM (digital-rights-management) free, what that means is the files have no copy protection but you get them at a higher bit-rate - a first for Universal and Island.

    Still not the point, I want to spend the money to get me a top-sounding CD when I see it on the shelves. None of U2's albums so far have bad sound quality, because they're mastered. Many artists releasing albums nowadays have terrible sound quality. The songs aren't bad, but the sound on it is. Rather than doing it fully digitally, put both albums out, but give the digital release 2-3 extra songs in decent sound quality.
  2. It would indeed be great if they released the on line album in a lossless format, but I think that it's just not commercially appealing enough. A lot of people don't know what a lossless format is and why the quality is better than mp3's. Or they don't care. They just want to play the songs on their iPod or mp3 player, and they don't want such large files for that.
  3. Originally posted by RDB92:It would indeed be great if they released the on line album in a lossless format, but I think that it's just not commercially appealing enough. A lot of people don't know what a lossless format is and why the quality is better than mp3's. Or they don't care. They just want to play the songs on their iPod or mp3 player, and they don't want such large files for that.


    kind of like me, i'm still not that clear on lossless. I am one for just let me put it on my ipod, I of course don't like bad sounding stuff, but mp3 seems to be ok for me, or whatever itunes converts files to
  4. If you listen to music on average headphones while travelling, jogging, whatever, an average lossy file is good enough, I agree. But I hardly do that. I use my Hi-Fi System and speakers that allow you to hear the difference between lossy and lossless recordings, especially when it's studio recordings.
    So a lossy only release would release piss me off.
    But for now, that's just another rumour...
  5. But an MP3 or AAC of 4MB compared to 38MB, wouldn't you think something's up there?
  6. God id be pissed with no lossless release.


  7. That's what pissed me off about Unreleased and Rare (and the whole Complete U2). First up, there were nine or so songs never-before released in any fornat, released in 128Kbps AAC, some of which were absolutely brilliant. They might have been demos and outtakes, but that's absolutely no excuse to put them out there in crap formats because they'd never been released. You can't tell me they were recorded in lossy format.

    No way I'm paying for a poor lossy release. This is why the digital age of online distribution should never take off, unless the record labels, the artists and associated parties agree on doing it right and getting it right. How much does actually releasing an album, on CD cost nowadays? It doesn't even have to have a booklet, just a simple silver CD face and that's it.

    Why not do what Radiohead did? Release the album a few months before the physical release. If the songs are good, people will buy them. Surely U2 know this.
  9. Problem is that a lossy AAC or MP3 is downloaded in a few seconds. People don't want to wait long for their music if they download it. That's the general rule I think. People like us that who want lossless music are in the minority.
  10. I just want to be able to run to the store, go to the right shelf, and be able to pick up a physical regular ordinary music album. That's all I want.


  11. Amen to that

    (Altough I prefer to order it and get it send to me, so I don't have to go outside through the cold )
  12. Originally posted by markp91:[..]

    Amen to that

    (Altough I prefer to order it and get it send to me, so I don't have to go outside through the cold )


    Oh I disagree here. I prefer going to the shop myself, I wanna see what I buy, get a free poster with it
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.
U2start is run by fans for fans. Help us reduce personal costs. Consider to make a donation to support us.