10mb Limit

Posts 1 - 25 of 26
  1. 318543
    profplum : Tue 25th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    Anyone else have a problem with The 10mb upload limit on your tracks.My latest piece when exported out at 320 for a track that was just over 4 mins came to about 17mb so i had to lower the quality quite alot to enable upload here.
    So my site idea would be to allow 1 track premium quality maybe 20mb which i feel maybe to hard to implement into the site,or just up the limit a bit/mb.

  2. 674084
    Neuro : Tue 25th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    yea ive had tracks in competitions that i couldnt upload because of that... so im down for that... YOU HAVE ONE VOTE FROM ME SIR

    DJD Beatz

  3. 365820
    WongKiShoo : Tue 25th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    it's 10mb for a reason.. are you gonna pay for the storage?

    It was 7mb for the new site went online so be grateful it's 10mb

  4. 189474
    ImproveWithError : Tue 25th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    For me its not a big deal, I export everything at 190 I myself and a lot of others do not listen to their music on anything that can really tell a substantial difference.

  5. 270061
    JoyfulWAVE : Tue 25th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    im not sure from what source you converted your mp3...make sure the source is 16 bit and not 24 bit...
    my latest song is 3:58 minutes in mp3-320 = 9.1 mb...
    if your song is a bit longer then convert it to mp3-256...its still a great quality...i dont get your problem ;)
    cheers...JW...

  6. 318543
    profplum : Tue 25th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    @wonkyshoe you sound like someone who would lecture me on starving children if i didnt eat all my dinner.
    Just be grapefruit indeed.
    @JoyfulWave thanks for the informative comment i will check out the 16 bit not 24 bit thing.My last track had to upload at 192 to be under 10mb and i could tell the difference in quality.

  7. 831304
    DubTek : Tue 25th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    to be fair, dew player wouldnt be able to convert extra kb difference into a substantial sound quality difference anyway. 10mb is fine. more than fine even

  8. 287207
    ScreamingZombie : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    For a long tune fully mastered and high quality, 10mb is rather small. but hey, its free so im not complaining

  9. 63133
    RogueAi : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    I have to use averaging or variable encoding just to get my music under 10mb. My last song was over 7 minutes and would be around 17 mb at 320.

  10. 365820
    WongKiShoo : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    @profplum.. don't be a dick dude. I was just being matter of fact.. storage comes out of admin's pocket. Bare in mind it's a free site.. other similar sites have a 128kbps rule,.. so be 'grapefruit' you have more room to manoeuvre here than other places is what I'm saying.

    And for the record.. I don't really care about starving children. Their forbears should have moved out of the dry and desolate lands centuries ago. It doesn't take a genius to work out whether the land they live off of is barren or not..

  11. 372886
    Bilbozo : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    I seem to get away with 320k, 16 bit at 48000hz for a 4 minute song. If it's slightly over I usually have to resample to 256K. I can't really hear the difference in quality. I am sure the roof of highs and lows may drop out a bit...but it's so slight, it's not even audible. Of course, being a guitar player and playing loud live gigs...my ears have been through a lot of abuse. I use ear protection now and most of my sharpness of hearing and loss of tinitus have come back. Thanks got it wasn't permanenet. We all have to treat our ears like a crucial instrument for music. Hard to mix at low levels, but in small doses instead of hours at a time does the trick.

  12. 365820
    WongKiShoo : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    @Bilbozo - I hear ya dude :/

    My right ear has lost about 15(ish)% of it's previous sensitivity due to abuse. My mixes are probably a bit unbalanced as a result lol

    But yeah.. if the mix and master has been done properly, you shouldn't be able to notice any real difference at all between 320 and 256

  13. 111346
    Planetjazzbass : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    First off..profplum is a dudette! (and a very pretty one if my memory serves me well{going back to the days when members could upload pics,and many other features that have since disappeared},apologies for any avert sexism..none implied)...I must admit I'd prefer a larger track limit size as some of my compositions conceptually are much larger(you could just make different tracks in a series,but realistically who's going to run with that)..however I've sort of programmed my thinking into the 4-6 minute song format..I don't have a problem with this as I've found the attention span of the average music listener is short....being a Fusion player as in Jazz Fusion,my whole mind set leans towards longer productions,but like many things what I get into is seemingly irrelevant by today's standards.lol...when the site reopened I was delighted to see the Loop size increased to 10MB,then deflated when this was decreased to 5MB..Yes it is a free site,and beggars can't be choosers I suppose...but the loop makers and acapella contributors make this a viable operation to some degree so I don't consider myself a beggar....I'm a very loyal Looperman supporter and that's not going to change but I do think this place needs some expansion.

  14. 318543
    profplum : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    @wonkypoo you really are quite rude.. as for storage coming out of admins pocket they manage quite well to store my loops and have them downloaded around 40,000 times since ive been a member of this site that was set up to share loops.How many loops have you shared i guess zero,you just upload your tracks made with other peoples creations and sit back and wait for the pats on the back to make you feel good,and then given the chance patronise and insult me.You need to forget the loop and concentrate on the football see how i took the time to read your profile (man)...(0 Loops uploaded)
    All the best with your soccer (break a leg).
    Emily...

  15. 674084
    Neuro : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    yall tripin we supposed to be looperfam and yall arguing over 10mb...WTF ... if you wasnt down in the first place then you should have let the forum die down...dont come and start problems about staving children, grapefruits and such... *says in British accent*

    DJD Beatz

  16. 365820
    WongKiShoo : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    "wonkypoo" .. lol.. real mature ;)

  17. 444193
    StereoMathematics : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    well, i knew this was bound to happen again. seemed a little over due, but once again, raging dramatic bullshit has crept into another post...what was it, about 19 days?
    its been said before, looperman is a music site, it should be used for that. so get back to the music.

    wanna act a donkey, go to twatter or fascebook.

  18. 372886
    Bilbozo : Wed 26th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    Here is some stat info added up, from the bottom of the page. Check it out...

    Total Members : 457765 (almost a half million members !)

    Each member has a total of 50 songs x 10 MB (a half gigabyte). Now most haven't posted songs, but imagine if they did. It's maximum potential would be 218 Terabytes of Information.

    However: The Total Tracks is 82123. Multiply that by 10Mb which comes out to only 821 GB.

    Total Loops and Acapellas Combined is 39030. If we average one Mb average it would total an additional 39GB, so the combined total of track & looops would be Total 860 GB

    Not to mention all the codeing of text such as the forums etc.

    It probably round itself out to a Terabyte or so. Likely Shan had minimum, double the room or more to spare.

    Doesn't sound like much, but in the grand scheme of things imagine that one half million people are accessing and moving and interacting, adding and removing files all at the same time. It's simply mind boggling !

    I sure as heck would not want to pay his bandwidth billing, that is for sure !

  19. 674084
    Neuro : Thu 27th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    i wonder where looperman gets the money for this

  20. 318543
    profplum : Fri 28th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    so we are allowed 50 tracks @ 10 mb per track thats 500mb.Not that many members do 50 tracks.So instead of a 50 track limit there could be a Mb limit, so members who wish to make an epic 22min track and upload in one go can.
    So to recap some people think 10mb is enough,and there are members who dont think 10mb is enough.
    There are also member that think we should be grateful for what we are given
    So my thread the posts are in i would ask instead of a 50 track limit a Mb limit on track uploads.

  21. 372886
    Bilbozo : Fri 28th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    I understand your point ProfPlum, in fact on some sites that is exactly what they do. You have a data limit and you can use it up on as many songs as you wish whether it's one song or 50 songs. Unfortunately..there would be a tremendous amount of coding to change the system to what you are requesting. Do I think Shan will entertain the notion and do all the recoding?...very likely not, but it doesn't hurt to ask. Send him a PM.

  22. 1
    Looperman : Fri 28th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    the limit is in place for disk space reasons.

    its set like that for simplicity at the moment.

    I may look at the options talked about here in future. we have discussed this in the past. its not a huge problem to make it happen but im working on other things at the moment that are more important.

  23. 589130
    Unknown User : Fri 28th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    @Proflum - JoyfulWAVE made a good point on rendering your track to 16 bit depth. How many vsts are you using on your track? Are you using your send tracks to feed your mix tracks when necessary? That helps free up your file size. It's just a thought to take into consideration.

  24. 318543
    profplum : Fri 28th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    @Bilbozo i agree changing code is prob an epic task.
    Site ideas and suggestions is what is asked of us (maybe)
    in this thread anyway.
    P.s.Shan has house elves to do his coding heres one in disguise doing a pop video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcXNPI-IPPM

  25. 715796
    Reficul1889 : Fri 28th Sep 2012 : 9 years ago

    This is an interesting thread! The intricacies of this issue elude me somewhat, as I'm not too technologically savvy, but I have learned a great deal from this discussion.
    16 bit and not 24. I'll remember that!

    @ Stereo, you're being a hypocrite, and guilty of seeding drama as just very recently you posted to a thread having to do with sampling, your own dramatic two cents on how sampling is wrong, though the thread had nothing to do with the ethics of sampling. Here you post not to add to the discussion, but only to decry the direction some took it in, which is just as bad. Methinks thou doth protest too much.

Posts 1 - 25 of 26

 ! You need to Log In or Register to post here.