Responding to the haters

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
How in the world could anyone despise Wayne Coyne? The guy is pretty well respected here, in his hometown, even if some of his positions go against the grain of the establishment. Most older people either accept it or look the other way, most younger people relish in that.

If you avoid his social media exploits then yeah. But his angering the native american community over his position on Christina Fallon's native american headdress photo, his leaving his wife for a 25 year old, his firing of Kliph from the band kind of bummed a lot of long time fans out.
 
[...]I don't download. In order to send files electronically, they have to be compressed, which degrades the quality of the music.[...]

I don't want to come across as a smart ass, but I just can't help myself... :rolleyes:You don't have to compress a music file in order to send it. Uncompressed wav files travels quite safely over the net nowdays. No longer a reason for not downloading. Lossless is your friend.

And, luckily, the quality of the music won't be affected at all. The sound quality might... ;-)

As for the haters. In my area nobody gives a flying fuck about U2 as far as I can tell. A text like yours, allthough well written, is just fuel to fire. Probably just makes more people aware of the "situation"...


Sent from my GT-I9070 using U2 Interference mobile app
 
I don't want to come across as a smart ass, but I just can't help myself... :rolleyes:You don't have to compress a music file in order to send it. Uncompressed wav files travels quite safely over the net nowdays. No longer a reason for not downloading. Lossless is your friend.

And, luckily, the quality of the music won't be affected at all. The sound quality might... ;-)

I don't want to come across as smart ass, but I just can't help myself. "Compressed" music can be lossless. FLAC and ALAC are both examples of compressed, "lossless" music that sound bit for bit exactly the same as an uncompressed WAV file. Because they are.

WAV, while also lossless of course, is actually a very inefficient way to send music over the internet, as file sizes are much are larger than a compressed lossless format like FLAC or ALAC, and this is the reason why the latter two are the preferred method for distributing lossless music on the internet for companies which do so. So while music doesn't need to be compressed to download (or upload) it, it makes it much easier.

The sound quality loss you're referring to is in compressed music which has been re-encoded via lossy compression (e.g. MP3 or AAC).

Lossless compression is your friend.
 
Your absolutely right. I just thought that was a tad bit too off topic. The compression at hand in op was lossy mp3 et al. Not flac. But, I fully agree. Smart ass! :)
Wav > Flac > Rar is your friend.

Sent from my GT-I9070 using U2 Interference mobile app
 
Your absolutely right. I just thought that was a tad bit too off topic. The compression at hand in op was lossy mp3 et al. Not flac. But, I fully agree. Smart ass! :)
Wav > Flac > Rar is your friend.

Sent from my GT-I9070 using U2 Interference mobile app

I didn't mean to be a smart ass, just taking the piss. Anytime someone starts out a sentence with "I don't mean to be smart ass", you know they're about to be a smart ass.

I don't mean to be a smart ass, but if you're going to be a smart ass, don't say you don't mean to be smart ass. Just be a smart ass. Or not. :)
 
Never said I didn't mean to - rather that I don't want to but can't help it.
Right? Taking the piss... wtf. This place...

Sent from my GT-I9070 using U2 Interference mobile app
 
Back
Top Bottom