Which is the smallest (high quality) video format, and where is the best place to download FULL music videos in this format?

Quotes of the Day

Do what everybody else does, do a search for: download FULL music videos.

Don't you think I looked before posting this? I just thought someone could point me to a site that let's me download without having to go to multiple sites. I thought Virtual Videos.net would be good, but when I clicked on the "Click here for FREE ONLINE VIDEOS BY: ..." link, it took me to a site that had nothing to do with downloadable music videos.

Quotes of the Day

I hear ya! I am sick of looking at jerky streaming videos because the website can't handle the demand. If anyone knows a place where you can actually download music videos please let me know.

"Is there life after death? Mess with my computer and find out."

Rosewill Thor V2 Case
ASUS P8Z77-V
Intel I-5 3570
2x4GB Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600
XFX Core Edition FX-7870
60GB SSD Corsair Force Series GT
2TB Seagate Barracuda
Rosewill Hive-750W

The legality of *most* music videos on the internet is dubious at best. So I am not sure if this is really acceptable talk in this forum. I would appreciate a mediator's second opinion.

(Music videos are liscensed to MTV and others you can record them but are not supposed to distribute because of royalties and copyright violations.)

SUPERCZAR
My Comps

Yeah, it's pretty screwy when you can record full videos off MTV or full songs off the radio... but *HEAVEN FORBID* someone actually save one of these songs or videos on their HDD.

BTW... I've downloaded a metric crapload of music videos from usenet... something like alt.music.video or alt.multimedia.music or alt.binaries.videos.music, you get the idea.

Good luck

max

Thats a good point....Why is it ok to do that? OR is it?

Just because it's posted on Usenet doesn't mean it's legal. There have been cases where the people who post stuff have been successfully prosecuted.

JP

Getting stuff from binary newsgroups doesn't work well with some newsgroup readers, so why bother.

Quotes of the Day

Right John, and using a computer is sometimes too difficult and prone to blue screens and crashes, so why bother?

We bother because we like to. We help and teach eachother. If we haven't found a good program to do something, we ask the forum for help. I guess you just give up though?

I use NewsBin, it's a "set-it-and-forget-it" newsgroup downloader... supply the newsgroup server, groups you want to download from, specify file extensions if you want, and the download folder, then hit "start". Start it up at night, with cable/dsl and a big hard drive, you could have 10GB when you get up in the morning

This is just a suggestion, but I find it really easy and cool.

max

> I guess you just give up though?

If I gave up, I would not even be a member of this forum.

I do try to solve my own PC problems before posting a question, but sometimes I do need some help in her, and IMHO this forum is a lot better than any newsgroup.

Quotes of the Day

> why bother?

Ok, lemme clarify here, I just meant that the Newsreaders I've tried never seem to download an entire file, especially when it's in many parts like <1/1>, <1/2>, <1/3>. Some readers say they will automatically put these 3 parts together, but it won't, so if it's a music file, and you end up with <1/1>, but not <1/2> or <1/3>, the file is incomplete. The same can happen with any type of file downloaded from a binary newsgroup, unless the file you're getting is in one whole instead of multiple parts.

Anyone would get much better results using a file sharing program(this is not 100%), or find the file you want on a website.

Quotes of the Day

Missing file pieces (in this case, messages) is the fault of the news server that you are logging onto, not the news reader program! Serious Usenet users often sign up for a pay service, such as SuperNews, which gaurantees the newsfeed.

JP

Like JP says, you can't get anywhere on Usenet without a pay service. I pay just $6/month to Acess-Usenet for three servers that have everything. It's not as fast as a good ISP provided one, but they're severely limited retention time and group wise. You also need a good binary dl'er. I like NewsBin.

I really don't think there's a problem with it since Audiogalaxy is still in business. And Napster is legitimizing itself.

Quotes of the Day

OH PULEEEASE! The same has been said about MP3s...how many of us have MP3s? I currently have 227 <422MB worth(after converting to 64 kbps WMA)>.

Quotes of the Day

64KBPS should not even be considered music, especially WMA format..YUCK!! How can you even listen to that crap?

I use dBpowerAMP Music Converter with the dBpowerAMP-codec-wmav8 add-on to convert my downloaded MP3s to 64 kbps WMA, and they sound excatly the same as their 128 kbps (sometimes even 192 kbps MP3 counterparts thru WinAmp.

To each his/her own.

Quotes of the Day

All I can say is,what a waste of good files,lol !

Another satisfied PC Q&A customer

Theres no way in hell a 64KBPS WMA file sounds the same as a 192 KBPS .MP3...then again, some people cant tell the difference between a .wav and an .mp3, and you might just be one of those people.

My point exactly. No two set of ears are the same. Besides, I don't know if your sound card is hooked up to your stereo speakers or if you're just using your computer speakers like I am. Incidently, mine are Creative CS120s with 3D Enhancement turned on.

Quotes of the Day

Attachment #1, (gif file)

I listen to music on both systems, one has a set of CyberAcoustic satellites with a lil sub. I use this system for initial audio editing and mixing. The other computer is hooked up to a HK Digital Receiver, and a pair of Wharfedale Rubiance towers, where i do all the fine tuning. But i can still here huge differences in media type, but thats just because i have been doing this for so long

I'm still waiting for Shelly to get in on this thread, just so he'll give us his system specs

I burn CDs,and listen to them on my Bose home stereo speakers with a subwoofer,and I guarantee you,I'd be able to tell the difference ! But it's true what you say,johnrsellers ,to each his/her own.Some people just can't hear a full spectrum or frequency of sound waves,just as we mortal humans can't hear above 20k hz.But you know that dogs can.
lol

Another satisfied PC Q&A customer

Thats not exactly true, some people can hear over 20K, just as some can hear below the 20Hz range..i can hear down to 16 Hz, but anything below that at over 105 DB and i get very nauseated.

But since your using a Bose system, you won't have to worry about it producing ANYTHING accurately

>But since your using a Bose system, you won't have to worry
>about it producing ANYTHING accurately

Oh, so very true. I weep when I hear someone brag about their Bose audio system (especially in automotive applications: my Maxima came with the upgraded "Bose" system, of course the deck was a Clarion, *NOT* Bose) I currently have 6 Bose speakers and 1 Bose "Clarion" head unit in my closet... only used for 3 months.


Again,

TRY NEWSBIN!!!!!!!!

http://www.newsbin.com/downloads.htm

max

ouch! DM

My sound card(s) output via 1/4 inch RCA's to my outboard AV preamp/processor ( Denon ), then to two Carver amps. One for the subwoofer ( dual Orion 8" woofers in a 4 chamber box taken from my old car, driven by 250 watts each. The other amp is 100 W x 2 to swiveled Solid ( B+W ) monitors on each side of my main monitor. The system rocks ( or is subtle, if need be )!!

There is no way in hell I'll use the WMA format. I create .mp3's at 256 kbps.

Some people are happy with an Emerson receiver from Walmart, or a $9 battery operated radio. In some ways, I envy them- it'd be cheaper! I'm just not one of them. Sound reproduction is a huge passion with me. This is the least of the systems in the house/garage, but as I seem to spend more time here than anywhere it has to be good.

Scott

Still Crunching To Crush Cancer




Somebody, Stop Me!

> But since your using a Bose system, you won't have to worry about it producing ANYTHING accurately

No kidding, I used to be a Bose dealer & it always cracked me up when someone called Bose speakers accurate!! .

Yup, I cannot...hear the difference. But then, I can't even tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi, coffee or decaf...etc
Now on the subject, I think that the web should be just like tv and the vcr. If you're going to use if for your own personal use, no problem. I think that most people are like this. I mean, I wouldn't even ever think of 'trying' to sell something. Like trying to sell a video tape of an old 'Seinfeld' show. Who'd wanna buy that? This is just an example.

Gravity....not just a good idea, it's the law!
My Magic

i use www.kazaa.com and get mpeg videos ..divx works good........what kind of music do you like , i've collected over a 1000 music videos from all different places but i have most everything they've played on mtv haah.

All I know is that my new Bose home system sounds better than any other speakers I have ever heard.And furthermore are the greatest speakers ever made ! I've been using variations of Bose since 1976(before they where popular) and swear by them.Accuracy, you can produce statistics skewed to favor any figures or data,and really doesn't mean squat,but where it really counts is when the rubber meets the road,so to speak,or comes out of the speaker and you actually experience it,is what is important,not data. No I am not affiliated with Bose.Inc in any fashion whatsovever,and was not compensated for this testimonial.
GO BOSE !

Another satisfied PC Q&A customer

Mike,

When I said that Bose speakers where not accurate, I didn't mean that in a derrogatory way. Bose speakers are not supposed to be accurate, they are made to make rock & roll sound good & they do a great job of that.

Speakers like Kef are accurate, & are a great choice for classical music but sound boring for Pink Floyd.

John M ,well,sorry but as you can see music is very personal to me,and I also have a wide taste in different musical styles and play anything from Beethoven to Frank Zappa,and everything in between.I thought the whole idea of Bose's "direct/reflecting" theme was to produce a more realistic performance and reproduction by not having the sound eminate from predictable places,as in an auditorium where sound is reflected from the ceiling as well,which is possible using the Bose.

Another satisfied PC Q&A customer

In a way, you're right Mike but Bose speakers have way too much bass & way to bright a high end to sound accurate to an "audiophile"

I sold both kind of speakers for years & sold a lot of high end "audiophile" equipment.

Don't get me wrong, I don't particularly like "accurate" speakers. I owned a $6000 pair of Infinity speakers that where super accurate & I ended up selling them to buy a less accurate set that sounded better to me.

Ok,John M,I quess you're off the hook,LOL
But I still have an axe to grind with DM,who started me on this tirade ! j/k

Another satisfied PC Q&A customer

LOL,

Part of the problem is, "what is an audiophile"??

I love music about as much as anyone & I also like all kinds of music. I like classic rock, but my 13 year old son is a jazz guitar player & I love that also.

Let me explain what a true audiophile is: I had a salesman who worked for me that lived, ate & breathed high end audio equipment. Everything had to be "accurate" or he would ridicule it. He was an amazing salesman, he was the #1 Luxman salesman in the country at one time.

He was so into audiophile equipment that he lived in a $400 a month apartment at one point so he could afford to buy $35,000 worth of stereo equipment!!

Even though his equipment was worth that much, I liked my stereo better than his. He had all these bizarre recordings he listened to just because they showed off his system. I was constantly busting his chops, telling him to put on some good music(let's hear some old Stones music)but the audio quality of an old recording would annoy him so much that he would never do it.

I have a pair of Klispch Corwalls which are big and ugly, even though I put a cover on them from Klispch, that I would not trade. Love them speakers; and I can shake the house with 50 watts thru them.

Can not say much for the 64 bit audio however, (nor Bose).

People like that should be shot. Whats the use of high-end audio equipment if all you're doing is showing off how accurate it is? Personally, if someone came to my house and did an RTA, they would definitely NOT get "flat" response, because "flat" response sucks total ass.

An audiophile is someone whose stereo costs more than their record collection.

hehe, bring it on!

Take a look at any Bose speaker, like the 301-901 series...one of the things you will notice is they still use paper cone woofers and (gasp) foam surrounds! Yeah, i like it when my speakers rot. On the other hand, Bose speakers have the lowest defective rate of any consumer level speaker (so those Martin-Logans or the upper end Tannoys don't count), at least they did when i was still in the industry.

I have yet to hear any Bose speaker, even the upper end 901 with the add-on EQ module, produce bass anywhere close to what i consider to be "on". Way too much in the 70Hz range, and basically nothing below 50Hz...thats a whole lot of sound to miss.

BTW, are those the DVC versions of the Orions? and are they XTRs? I used to have a 12" Cobalt DVC in the old home theater, I always preferred the tight reponse of the Cobalt over the sheer impact power of the XTR, but bang for the buck wise they were pretty good...ah, if only i could afford 8 MTX Blue Thunders and a few Earthquake Cinenova Grande amps to push them

I'll have to agree,John M,I remember 20years ago,reading those Stereo Review,and High Fidelity magazines,and looking at their benchmark tests and statistics,and when the price for just a turntable cartridge reached $2500 dollars,I thought to myself,there is some sort of elite snobbery going around !

Another satisfied PC Q&A customer

I only have one speaker in my computer and it's only 2 inches wide and there's only one, so how could I get stereo out of that?

I have no idea,old dude ,but I'm sure someone here will know,if you stick around ! LOL

Another satisfied PC Q&A customer

They are the XTReme series, but only single voice coil.

For the living room, I use Infinity Prelude Compositions. They are a thin tower with seven drivers, atop a powered side firing 12" subwoofer. I drive them with Audio Research tube amps. I feed them with outboard DACs and a digital transport. They sound good and clean. The only thing I wish I had was more ummphh to the bass. The living room is 16' x 22' and the bass, though present down to perhaps 25-30 Hz, and fairly accurate, doesn't have the kick that I like. Heh, for that I would need serious subwoofers. Like REL, or ( maybe ) high-end Infinitys. But then that brings on crossover issues, not to mention money issues.

And then there is the car...now, THAT is dialed in.

I've invested way too much in audio equipment. Not planning on going there, at that same level, again. Enough is enough!

Besides, I mainly transferred my addiction to computer systems and networks.

Salvation through electronics!??! Heh.

Scott

Still Crunching To Crush Cancer




Somebody, Stop Me!

Hehe,it's the L RON HOOVER CHURCH OF APPLIANTOLOGY
Where gratification can only be achieved through the use of machinery

Another satisfied PC Q&A customer

I can't believe a room thats relatively small isn't being driven by those Infinity's ...aren't they the series that came out in 2000 that have RABOS or some crap that is basically a modified parametric equalizer just for the sub? I would try tweaking that a bit, 2 12" subs running off of those class-D built in amplifiers should be more than enough.

Now, if your REALLY looking for some low-end punch, check out the newest incarnation of the Sunfire True Subwoofer (Signature II, i believe), or some of the monster jobs from HSU Research, or even the Velodyne 18" model (not the CT series, the only one that was decent in that line was the 10"). The first time i saw a True Subwoofer, i was still working at Circuit City (stop laughing)...i went over to Magnolia Hi-Fi, and the sales person asked me how much i weighed. At that time, I was rail thin, 5'11" and weighed about 140 lbs. He turned so the sub was facing upwards and said "go ahead, stand on it"..so i stood on the speaker, and he started playing TechMaster PEB's "Bassgasm", and this thing literally pushed me off...impressive.


EDIT: SHELLY, I'm still waiting for you to post your system specs, I wanna drool

No, it is not those with the RABOS bass eq thing. Those would give me the bass I crave. They have 850W BASH amps built in. The ones I have have, like, 120 watt amps built in.

These Infinitys are the Infininity Prelude Composition PF-Rs, not the latest incarnation of the Composition line (the MTS), but the first. I wish! Those things go for 8K! These are now discontinued, they last went for $3600/pr., I bought them for 2350 in '95. They sound great, are highly efficient and image spectacularly.

Here is a mention of mine, in an article about the ones your talking about:

"Yet the brand name seemed to founder for a while as Infinity's speakers didn't catch fire with the core audiophile market. Then someone made the decision to carefully rebuild the Infinity franchise as a premier line of innovative loudspeakers. Serious corporate assets were invested in design talent and technology.

With the introduction of Compositions in 1995, the investment paid off. A precursor to the Prelude MTS loudspeaker under review here, the Composition Prelude PF-R (very favorably reviewed in the September 1995 Stereophile, Vol.18 No.9) was a truly original design in the Infinity tradition. It put Infinity back on the map as a serious player in the specialty audio market."



Heh heh. Don't get me wrong, there is definitely bass with those Infinitys. But, just not as much as I'd like. I like bass that can resonate through any cavities in my body, if turned up loud enough. Feel the music, if I choose.

My car stereo has definitely spoiled me in that regards. I have a dedicated A/D/S amp pushing 160 watts/channel, going to each of 2 10's in a Honda Accord. The impact and tightness of the bass is stunning. I can have a back message anytime I want while driving. The subwoofer is crossed over at 50Hz.


Scott

Still Crunching To Crush Cancer




Somebody, Stop Me!

I had a friend whose parents had way too much money to give to him, he eventually set up his 93 Cavalier with 2 15's, 2 12's, and 4 8's in his trunk, Infinite Baffle of course...the compression was so much that it would close your throat, and you couldn't breathe...Now THATS some bass for ya..

I've never understood the point of being an audiophile. The difference between a multi-thousand dollar speaker system and a consumer-level speaker system is miniscule at best. My $70 Grado SR-60 headphones provide all the audio quality I need.

Also, when buying music CDs, I don't really care about the quality of the recording material, all I care about is the skill of the conductor and performers. That's why many of my classical music CDs are recorded in ADD. Karajan's 1968 Beethoven symphony cycle, for example, completely and totally destroys all the modern DDD recordings out there in terms of sheer quality.

"miniscule at best"...that just means you haven't heard one yet, MrMan.

"all the quality i need"...that means "all the quality that i know exists". If you have heard some of the higher end Sennheisers or Sony Pro models, you would piss on those Grado's and never look back.

I doubt that he'd fail to notice the difference, but if he's like me he doesn't care. A $60 set of speakers or his headphones are probably good enough. I spend more money on things that matter. By the same token, for me, encoding music any higher than 128 or 160 kbps is just a waste of disk space. It sounds "good enough". I laugh at fools who record something from a record album and encode the mp3 files at 256 kbps.

I can still listen to 25 year old record albums and enjoy the music despite the crackles and pops. It doesn't have to be scientifically perfect. I think that is the point that MrMan was trying to make and if so, I agree with him.

Grogan

"scientifically perfect"...thats what I was saying about people that buy shitloads of equipment and then RTA for flat response...RTA is for IASCA, and other such assholes that don't actually like to LISTEN to music

Thats something that has always pissed me off about the IASCA circuit..you've got basically 25-50 big names, all these people with huge bank accounts, and they go out and have other people install their systems, RTA, Xover, etc., then they say "hey, look what i have"...its not like these dumbasses are even creative, they all do the same crap with vinyl and plexi, sometimes a few lights...just venting

You're learning but you don't know it, MrMan. Analogue recording is grossly superior by any musically important criteria compared to 16/44 digital. The latest digital recording formats give analogue a run, but you still have to reproduce it, and most are multi-channel, which limits the resolution vs. stereo, so analogue still wins. It's getting close though. The best sounding classical recordings ever made, and for the most part the best performances, are from RCA, Mercury and London/Decca circa 1955-1965.