rav0k

I didn't know that this was a paid service where you had the right to complain about one of the smallest issues in the history of mankind.

Very true, in which case I should have never even said anything to begin with and I do apologize. I have been working full time at Wal-Mart during the holiday season while also taking a full load of college courses. This doesn't even include the nerdrage I feel when I am playing Battlefield 3 and blow up in a jet within 10 seconds due to campers. Needless to say, I should have used 'mah brainz' before getting into this argument as it really had no relevance to the modest request that people were wanting for their money.

I never said anything about lossless. I'm talking about the 320kbps MP3 files of old demos that are being requested. I could record something with a 192kbps bitrate and you can make a lossless copy of it. You are still left with the sound of a 192kbps file. I agree with this statement. +1

I understand what you're saying, but it all just depends on what the input/output bitrate was. I can see you possibly getting a legitimate 256kbps file at most based on the times, but based on how Mike says 'professional studio' in the .pdf files, that's probably not likely. It's so easy for them to re-save a file as 320kbps. I personally just don't see a possible way to plug a guitar into a mixer, have the sound go straight into editing software with a recording rate of 256 kbps max and then saving the raw file as 320kbps and calling it legitimate. You're right about the newer stuff though, no doubt. You might actually be right about all of this. I'm just telling you what I know from school and possibly saving you from spending your money on stuff that is labeled as '320kbps', but is not actually as it appears.

Yeah, to please people like you who think that it actually meant something. I'm open to being corrected, but I took a few audio engineering classes and have even argued with people on this matter before. The general consensus has always seemed to be that you can't effectively take a 'shit' source and make it sound better by upscaling it. With that said, there are EQ's and all kinds of fancy things that do exist to make things sound better. Personally, that bugs the shit out of me when it comes to demos because I know that it's trickery, but I guess it's all trickery at the end of the day because it's all about what sounds good to the consumers.

The original quality of the audio sources for these demos were not even recorded at such a high rate. That's the point I am trying to get at. Robot Boy is a different story. I corrected myself with the MTM/ATS era. The MP3's that they uploaded themselves were not 320kbps either. As I said, it wasn't necessarily a convenience during those years.

Because the raw files themselves are still from a time when 320kbps wasn't really a convenience. Converting them to 320kbps does nothing. It would be like running a 480p movie through a 1080p monitor. It does nothing to improve the initial source. Edit: Feel free to complain about the newer songs though.

You're expecting 320kbps for a song that was initially recorded with less?

01. A.06 02. Part of Me 03. And One 04. In The End (LPU11 Demo) 05. Across the Line 06. Pale

+1

That would be reasonable, but it's not going to happen because of $$$. Physical copy = Patience. Digital = Impatience. Impatience earns the cash. Impatience + Patience = Even more cash.

My pleasure. Yep!

No reverse effect on the guitar, a lack of the digital 'dirty drums' and an extended intro that incorporates the chorus piano parts is enough for me to call it entirely different. Forgive me.

In The End is a completely different mix that we have not heard before. Bass riff is different. There are existent ambient sounds that we haven't heard before. However, the lyrics seem to have been heard in previous leaked demos. Bang Three has a different intro entirely. The different piano parts are still in the final mix, but during the chorus instead. The bridge is completely different. It was changed in the final mix to incorporate the guitar solo. The Esaul on this edition is the first studio version we have heard of the Frat Party jam. (Not trying to be an ass, just adding more detail for anyone that is interested in purchasing.)

Soon, the Aztec moon will heat my room... HEAL MY WOUNDS!

Well, I meant as far as lyrical content goes.

Based on the preview I heard, it's , lyrically.

Creating hype to strike curiosity is such a terrible concept.

1) This video was not out a year ago. 2) Why did you not submit it as news when you saw it?

I believe you are correct. The other videos on the channel say "promo for new Remo product" in the video descriptions.

Professional drummer C.G. Ryche recorded this video of Rob on the drums back in January. Update: It appears that this performance was held to showcase Remo drum skins (Thanks, Pez). Thoughts?

All of your posts seem to relate to something that the band did eight years ago. A Thousand Suns reflects where they are musically and mentally. I see no reason for them cover Wish at this point. However, there are far greater songs that Nine Inch Nails has done that would be a great choice.

What does popularity have to do with perceived sound?