bitrate

[Miguel51]

Sometimes, I spend several days to download files, and when I get a free slot and download the first file, I see the bitrate to be only 128 or less, isn't it deceiving? Can something be made to see the bitrates in advance?

[cologic]

http://dcplusplus.sourceforge.net/forum ... php?t=2312[/url]

[mai9]

I suggest to join some high quality mp3 hub as the best option.
An mp3 encoded with Xing is crappy no matter the bitrate. (read this last line again )

The best feature of DC++ is having closed hubs that get specific on what they offer/share. For example: only anime, or only books, or only movies in spanish, or only music in MPC

If they are lots of users that only want high quality mp3s, why not join a hub that does that? you are really not the first to want this.

You can start reading here:
http://www.ubershare.com
But there's more than one hub that does that.

[leadenboy]

sorry to keep this duplicate thread going, but i think this point needs to be emphasized. one of the best features of directconnect is specialized hubs. however, hubs that specialize both on the content (eg style of music) and the form (eg bitrate and encoding) of files will likely end up with a very small pool of users to draw on because of this double specialization. (not to mention that obviously people with *some* badly encoded/low bitrate files don't generally *only* have such files.)

maybe a few people will be satisfied with the reduced range of stuff that mai9's strategy gives them access to, but far from everyone will. the take-home message is, it *will* reduce the range.

btw, looking through some very big public hub lists, i haven't been able to identify any such hubs. the web site you suggested lists a single one, which requires 40 of your own rips to join. very exclusive! but the existence of such hubs in no way negates the value of this feature for the rest of us mp3 plebes, who are constantly exposing ourselves to the dirt and danger of low-bitrate and badly encoded files that are spread unpredictably throughout the vast majority of the p2p world, outside tiny high-bitrate gated communities like that one.

[Wisp]

I suggest to join some high quality mp3 hub as the best option.
An mp3 encoded with Xing is crappy no matter the bitrate. (read this last line again )

But the amount of mp3's will be very low, i wouldn't find the mp3's i want in such a hub.

[Wisp]

one of the best features of directconnect is specialized hubs. however, hubs that specialize both on the content (eg style of music) and the form (eg bitrate and encoding) of files will likely end up with a very small pool of users to draw on because of this double specialization. (not to mention that obviously people with *some* badly encoded/low bitrate files don't generally *only* have such files.)

That's exactely what I wanted to say.

[Wisp]

Maybe a little offtopic but I think hubowners/bots should automatically send a warning message to users who share 'audiocatalyst' because it produces crappy mp3's. Many people don't know this, but it's very annoying if you downloaded an 192kbit album of 70mb and find out it's al encoded with xing..

[mai9]

Well, do as you please. I just tried to help you with the crappy mp3 problem.
But don't judge what you haven't seen.

maybe a few people will be satisfied with the reduced range of stuff that mai9's strategy gives them access to, but far from everyone will. the take-home message is, it *will* reduce the range.

it's not reduced.

[mai9]

Maybe a little offtopic but I think hubowners/bots should automatically send a warning message to users who share 'audiocatalyst' because it produces crappy mp3's. Many people don't know this, but it's very annoying if you downloaded an 192kbit album of 70mb and find out it's al encoded with xing..

Well, it seems that knowing the bitrate won't save you from crappy files

[Wisp]

Maybe a little offtopic but I think hubowners/bots should automatically send a warning message to users who share 'audiocatalyst' because it produces crappy mp3's. Many people don't know this, but it's very annoying if you downloaded an 192kbit album of 70mb and find out it's al encoded with xing..

Well, it seems that knowing the bitrate won't save you from crappy files

besides the bitrate, you can also show the encoder like in encspot

[leadenboy]

Well, do as you please. I just tried to help you with the crappy mp3 problem.
But don't judge what you haven't seen.

maybe a few people will be satisfied with the reduced range of stuff that mai9's strategy gives them access to, but far from everyone will. the take-home message is, it *will* reduce the range.

it's not reduced.

sorry, but this is obviously nonsense. using only hubs with the high-bitrate-only requirement means having access only to whatever is on those hubs. using those hubs *and* other hubs means having access to what's on both, necessarily more. (and of course the percentage of what's out there that's on hubs that aren't restricted in this way is in the high nineties; even, probably, the proportion of lame-encoded high-bitrate files that are available only on non-restricted hubs will be very high.)

[mai9]

sorry, but this is obviously nonsense.

No, it's not.

using only hubs with the high-bitrate-only requirement means having access only to whatever is on those hubs. using those hubs *and* other hubs means having access to what's on both, necessarily more.

It's non-sense when you look at this from a strictly rational point of view. But music is limited, it's not "two hubs, twice music". And our time for listening music is limited too.

There are millions of cds out there, but you are (probably) willing to have just one thousand. And probably those cds you want are shared for other users in that hub.

I guess you won't be satisfied with this yet-another-answer, but please don't keep telling me that I am wrong. I've been in both sides of the fence. And I am only trying to help.

PS: I didn't say that these hubs are larger than KaZaa. I just said "it's not reduced", no comparisons here.

[leadenboy]

sorry, but this is obviously nonsense.

No, it's not.

using only hubs with the high-bitrate-only requirement means having access only to whatever is on those hubs. using those hubs *and* other hubs means having access to what's on both, necessarily more.

It's non-sense when you look at this from a strictly rational point of view. But music is limited, it's not "two hubs, twice music". And our time for listening music is limited too.

There are millions of cds out there, but you are (probably) willing to have just one thousand. And probably those cds you want are shared for other users in that hub.

Actually, there's a good chance they're not shared there, which is the whole, entire, complete, total point. However, I give up: there is less, but the amount is not reduced.

[mai9]

Actually, there's a good chance they're not shared there, which is the whole, entire, complete, total point. However, I give up: there is less, but the amount is not reduced.

I dare to say that there's not even less

Our capitalist society grows with specialization. So an enterprise that only makes cars can make more (and better) cars than another bunch of enterprises that produce cars, planes and bikes.

[Marvin]

Well, there is an easy (lazy) way (I do this for a long time) : just put the bitrate in the name of the file, or the foldername, or a dummy file. Set is as a good behaviour/rule in your hub (or among the users you wish to share music with).

Of course you can replace "bitrate" with "bitrate and encoder" or whatever you like.

I'm aware that this is not an ultimate solution, but it might work in the small world of HQ music lovers (as long as audiophiles are interested in mp3).