REC
Active topics
  1. Originally posted by Mr_Trek:[..]

    Well, it could be Apple Lossless I guess. Which would mean that it'd technically be as good. Not better though.

    12 mb vs 75 mb. Hmmmmm, there is no physical way that they could be "as good".

  2. Then it's not Apple Lossless and is definitely not as good.
  3. I did'nt say m4a was better than flac, i know that it is not...
    m4a is equal as mp3...
    the sound is better, not the kind of file...
  4. thank you!
  5. thank you!
  6. Originally posted by discohype:I did'nt say m4a was better than flac, i know that it is not...
    m4a is equal as mp3...
    the sound is better, not the kind of file...

    Then I assume it comes from a different source, a differently transfered vynil or a lower gen tape; it's the only reason why it could sound better. If that's the case, would you care to share the lineage of your better sounding songs? Thanks
  7. Yes, I have downloaded it and it sounds really much better than the previous recording. More clarity and punch, and it runs a tad slower. Nice May I re-ask you for the lineage, discohype?
  8. hi,
    it come from the cd "four wild irish roses"
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.
Contribute to the U2 community with uploading photos or by telling us which shows you have visited.