Please Increase Size Of Track File Of Uploads

Posts 1 - 12 of 12
  1. 102056
    Dj4Real : Sat 29th Jun 2013 : 8 years ago

    I would like to request a small increase of the size of the tracks we can add... Right now it is at 10mb and I feel like it needs to be increased...maybe to 12 or 13... I do not think it is fair for me to get feedback on a track that is bad because I cant render my tracks to the best possible sound.... 10mb provides low quality beats.... Most tracks that have been mastered correctly are at somewhere between 11 and 15mb. I cant post most of my songs because of this reason. You want to hear my best stuff, but I cant post it cause It is slightly over 10mb. Can we please change it..

    I would like to get support from other members.

  2. 851137
    crucethus : Sat 29th Jun 2013 : 8 years ago

    @DJ4Real

    I just checked the length of your songs and the MB you use. The most length you use is about 6 and a half minutes. If you render as an mp3 at 192, the 6 minute songs should fit, if you render at 128 everything will definately fit. Only if you go below 128 should the listener start to hear quality issues.

  3. 944056
    Darkreine : Sat 29th Jun 2013 : 8 years ago

    Agreed Steve, you can easily compress the mp3 without loss of quality.

  4. 585633
    topvega : Sat 29th Jun 2013 : 8 years ago

    I agree with crucethus and Darkreine. What do you render your tracks at that it won't fit?

    tv

  5. 630386
    JoeFunktastic : Sat 29th Jun 2013 : 8 years ago

    Just before the introduction of Looperman v2 the limit was 7mb. Now that was hard back then, so 10mb is very generous!

    On ReverbNation the limit is 8mb on a free account and their motive is to steer you into a paid account.

    Thanks Looperman!

  6. 883744
    ElectronBlue : Sat 29th Jun 2013 : 8 years ago

    You can compress 1 minute of audio to 0.91 meg at " 128 kbps CD quality audio MP3 " So you should, in theory, get about 10 minutes of audio on Looperman. I have compressed a 175 meg file to 6 minutes at 192 mp3 that's compression no loss of audio quality. The only loss of quality been my terrible mastering ability at the moment. After all we are only sharing our talents and demoing our work to each other. If some producer spots your talent and wants your work because it's that good I am sure they will pay for a studio session to put it out to the masses. Hope that helps. And thank you Looperman for keeping it free.

  7. 942317
    mallyob : Sat 29th Jun 2013 : 8 years ago

    heloooo! there's mp3 and then theres mp3PRO ,most people I think nowadays have systems that decode mp3pro. The PRO data that mp3PRO adds helps re-create high frequencies in the compressed file, especially at low bitrates. An mp3PRO file can still be played back by an mp3 player that does not support the PRO extensions, but it will sound slightly worse than a normal mp3 file of that bitrate. For example, a 64Kbps mp3PRO file will sound more like a 112 or 128Kbps normal mp3 file when played by a player that supports mp3PRO, but will sound like a 64Kbps or worse mp3 file if the player does not support mp3PRO.does that make sense? malbob.

  8. 102056
    Dj4Real : Sun 30th Jun 2013 : 8 years ago

    Its just a few that I have that are a tad over 10mb....like 10.3 and such. All the songs that I want to post are at 320kbs....Audio: 44,100 Hz, 16 Bit, Stereo.
    One minute of audio compresses to a file size of approximately 2.29 MB (about 4:1 compression).

    Better sound quality. I don't want to sacrifice sound quality for sound... It is noticeable..

  9. 102056
    Dj4Real : Sun 30th Jun 2013 : 8 years ago

    Meant to say, I don't want to sacrifice sound quality for a smaller sound file..... As far as reverbnation goes. I have qualified for the increase....being 100mb..

  10. 851137
    crucethus : Sun 30th Jun 2013 : 8 years ago

    http://www.maximumpc.com/article/do_higher_mp3_bit_rates_pay_off?page=0,0

    This is an article sumarizing a test made using various subjects...here is the summary.
    The Upshot

    "With the possible exception of the USB Key that survived a washing and drying cycle, no other Maximum PC Challenge has ever surprised us as much as this one. Its downright humiliating, in fact, that in many cases, we were unable to tell the difference between an uncompressed track and one encoded at 160Kb/s, the bit rate most of us considered the absolute minimum acceptable for even portable players. "

    Unless you have super human hearing and can hear beyond the range of normal humans 192 will do just fine. (Empirical evidence always beats peoples hunches and guess'es)

  11. 631823
    Mahloo13 : Mon 1st Jul 2013 : 8 years ago

    10mb is more than enough. I can see why you'd want to keep everything at 320 but even 192 is more than enough especially for electronic music. The loss in detail is acceptable, let's not forget that the casual listener has most likely got not audio training at all and wants to enjoy the track not criticize the quality of the file.

  12. 965188
    StrawHatDJ : Tue 2nd Jul 2013 : 8 years ago

    No way, just upload a section or as they say a snippet and if the peoples like what they hear they will click the link that you provide to hear it in its completedness.

Posts 1 - 12 of 12

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