|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
Author |
Message |
MrBoo
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:19 am |
|
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 3:35 am Posts: 1945 Been Liked: 427 times
|
A reason to change bit rates could be to remove any serialization in the audio file? That's really as much a question as anything. If so, it may make it hard to track back.
|
|
Top |
|
|
mrmarog
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:13 am |
|
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:13 pm Posts: 3801 Images: 1 Location: Florida Been Liked: 1612 times
|
Karaoke Croaker wrote: I don't believe that anyone had to match up any files to downsize the 320 GEM tracks to 128 GEM Tracks. MP3GToolz does all of the work for you automatically. Just set it and forget it. Some KJs like to run their shows from a single laptop without having to use an external hard drive....for the same reason that some KJs don't like to use a disc player in their system. It's just one less piece of equipment that can fail during a show. That being said, the average laptop hard drive is only 500GB to 1TB so bit rate can come in to play for some KJs and they can fit many more files on their internal hard drive if the files are ripped at 128 as opposed to 320. I've never run into a single karaoke enthusiast who avoided a particular karaoke show because of the tracks being ripped at 128 instead of 320. The average karaoke singer couldn't tell the difference between Sweet Georgia Brown and Sound Choice. If they have a Sweet Georgia Brown disc at home; then they want to sing the SGB version at a show. Familiarity is much more important to that person than the bit rate of the music. People don't make their karaoke choices by whatever bit rate the KJ has their files stored at. They make those choices based on the fun atmosphere of a particular show. The KJs that have to brag about their bit rate as a selling point usually have nothing else to base their reputation on so they try to make it seem like the bit rate is more important than it really is. When I first starting ripping for my Cavs JB99 in 2000, hard drive capacities were only 80GB. I had acquired almost 1000 discs by that time (I had a friend that owned a retail karaoke store) and 128 was considered the standard bit rate. I spent an exhaustive amount of time getting the graphics as clean as I could and the files spelled accurately and uniformly. As time went on I continued to grow my collection and I stayed with 128. The big improvement was the ripping quality of the error correction software, and the hard drive kept getting larger and cheaper. Were am I going with this: I have never re-ripped more than 2000 discs I own and they are still at 128. I have also never had anyone tell me that one song sounds so much better than another. In a noisy bar it would even be that much more difficult. Over the years some of my original discs that I stored in binders, and stacked on top each other, developed some pin holes because they stuck to the sleeves. Those I cannot re-rip. It simply is not possible or important enough for me to go to 320 on everything I own. I am 65 and my ears are not what they used to be, and my target audience, here in Florida, is my age or older. I will stick with 128 on my old collection and happily carry on.
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 7:54 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
jclaydon wrote: I can understand the reason for purchasing the chartbuster trademark in order to keep it from becoming 'freeware' but to force people who have already paid for their soundchoice certication to pony up again is too much, in my opinion ESPECiALLY since all PEP owns is the trademark, and had no involvement AT ALL in the creation of the actual tracks.
People who already have a SC certification will be able to register their CB original media at no additional charge. We haven't put that on the website yet. jclaydon wrote: I have already paid for my SC certification, which still hasn't taken place by the way, i paid for my GEM series (still not listed on website for that) and i even managed to pay towards the original advance program.
I think you mean to say that the audit hasn't taken place yet. You are certified and listed on the website as such. Since you mentioned it, I went ahead and had them add your GEM series license number to your directory record as well. We are in the process of reformatting the licensee directory, so we have not updated records as frequently of late.
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 8:01 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
c. staley wrote: JimHarrington wrote: Since you've claimed to have a non-expiring CB certificate, it will cost you nothing to register; all you have to do is supply us with a scan of the certificate and a group photo of your discs. Bwahahaha! I just about spewed on my monitor reading this pompous, arrogant and presumptuous demand! Gee whiz, you mean I can "register" for free? I'm still laughing... You have (or you claim to have) a certificate from a company that no longer exists. We're simply asking that you provide us with a copy of the certificate and a photo of your original media so that our records can accurately reflect your status. If the certificate is unexpired, we're not asking you to pay anything. If you don't want to cooperate, that's on you. c. staley wrote: I don't have to do anything for you. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. I'm under no obligation to give you diddly-squat or lift a finger. Especially just because you "want to know." You can "ask" all you want.... and in the interest of fair play, it will cost you nothing to ask.
Of course you don't have to cooperate. You can be a jackass about everything if that's your preference. c. staley wrote: I see that Chris Avis has verified that the gem tracks are in fact, on the IRC pirate channels. Of course he'll claim they're bogus because of the bitrate because he -- as well as bazza and sandman -- think that there is some sort of detectable difference in bitrate in a noisy club or that someone would actually take the time and trouble to "match up" the blue logo files with 128 audio for 6,000 files. A preposterous assumption to say the least.
What he confirmed is that there are tracks that claim to be GEM tracks on IRC, but that are not in fact GEM tracks. Since we know who all the licensees are, if we discover these bogus tracks in public use, that makes a willful infringement case virtually automatic. I'm perfectly comfortable with that state of affairs.
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 8:03 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
c. staley wrote: Bend ALL THEY WAY over..... You should probably keep your fantasies to yourself.
|
|
Top |
|
|
flees
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 11:30 am |
|
|
Novice Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 5:47 pm Posts: 43 Been Liked: 1 time
|
Jim can you post a list of the songs that are on the 3 extra GEM Disks?? I just ordered mine today and forgot to ask.
|
|
Top |
|
|
doowhatchulike
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:14 pm |
|
|
Super Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:35 am Posts: 752 Images: 1 Been Liked: 73 times
|
JimHarrington wrote: c. staley wrote: JimHarrington wrote: Since you've claimed to have a non-expiring CB certificate, it will cost you nothing to register; all you have to do is supply us with a scan of the certificate and a group photo of your discs. Bwahahaha! I just about spewed on my monitor reading this pompous, arrogant and presumptuous demand! Gee whiz, you mean I can "register" for free? I'm still laughing... You have (or you claim to have) a certificate from a company that no longer exists. We're simply asking that you provide us with a copy of the certificate and a photo of your original media so that our records can accurately reflect your status. If the certificate is unexpired, we're not asking you to pay anything. If you don't want to cooperate, that's on you. c. staley wrote: I don't have to do anything for you. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. I'm under no obligation to give you diddly-squat or lift a finger. Especially just because you "want to know." You can "ask" all you want.... and in the interest of fair play, it will cost you nothing to ask.
Of course you don't have to cooperate. You can be a jackass about everything if that's your preference. c. staley wrote: I see that Chris Avis has verified that the gem tracks are in fact, on the IRC pirate channels. Of course he'll claim they're bogus because of the bitrate because he -- as well as bazza and sandman -- think that there is some sort of detectable difference in bitrate in a noisy club or that someone would actually take the time and trouble to "match up" the blue logo files with 128 audio for 6,000 files. A preposterous assumption to say the least.
What he confirmed is that there are tracks that claim to be GEM tracks on IRC, but that are not in fact GEM tracks. Since we know who all the licensees are, if we discover these bogus tracks in public use, that makes a willful infringement case virtually automatic. I'm perfectly comfortable with that state of affairs. doowhatchulike wrote: These tracks are made to have on a computer, correct? Since MOST computers are exposed to the internet at some point, it is not beyond reason that someone's GEM-bearing computer may have been hacked. As you all know, all it takes is ONE person to do it for the data to be released into the wild... And, yes, I saw the word "virtually".....
|
|
Top |
|
|
Toastedmuffin
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:37 pm |
|
|
Advanced Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:49 am Posts: 466 Been Liked: 124 times
|
I'mpart of the '128' crowd.... Sure I have some newer CDs ripped at a higher bit rate, but maybe MAYBE 1 or 2% cares that it's that high, It's never been a factor for me. I don't use an external hard drive, so I carry all my music from my CDs, iTunes, and Amazon on the same drive. All the CDs had to be ripped, and the popular tracks are there too. Some of the stuff I bought but never use (Like classical music), I stream if I have a need AND I have wi-fi in the space. As the drive is 1TB, got to make it all fit on there somehow. As you all know, there are many factors with karaoke that go beyond the KJ: Things like alcohol, noisy spaces, quality of singer, etc. Unless your hosting the weekly version of The Voice, I personally don't see the need for a higher bit rate. But if that's what you want, then by all means go for it!! As for this GEM series stuff, Only the very ill informed/stupid would venture forth with the illegal set and work with it in a public space. Fine by me, SC can go after them all day and night in my opinion, they deserve it. Whoever put it out there also deserves to be sued to hell too, as they are most likely aware this wasn't a smart or legal move. And now that SC knows about it, they might just track it down if they can find it, good luck living that down. Only people I could see who might use a fake GEM set is 1) some home user who wants the 'karaoke experience' for private use (Not worth a lawsuit or worry in my opinion). 2) Some hard drive reseller who it trying to make some cash by selling this to new KJs and people (Very worth tracking down). Finally I've said enough about how I feel with SC about CB to not go and repeat myself... But I really think if SC wants to make some friends here, they should make it FREE to base line register the CB product KJs have. If someone wants the certification, with all the benefits that go along with it, then only because of the work involved there should be a small fee (to cover the expenses). I am getting tired of all the legal crap these days, its just not worth the headaches. This was a fun job to have, we make people happy every weekend, take some of their stress away by making them 5 minute rock stars, and shockingly we were able make some money on it too. I'm not getting rich from hosting karaoke, I'm a little fish who enjoys seeing people smile and have a good time, not a big production house who looks at the bottom line and profit margins. We know our singers by name, we know what they want to sing, and we try to keep them coming back so we can make ends meet. I've paid for my CDs and downloads once already, but now you want us to continue to pay for stuff we already own. To deal with your fees, I would have to become bigger, and I don't want that. Its really getting to be time to hang up the mics and go, and let those much better suited deal with the madness this business has become. Sad because I truly love this job, its been my passion and I don't know how I'm going to replace it.
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 12:55 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
doowhatchulike wrote: doowhatchulike wrote: These tracks are made to have on a computer, correct? Since MOST computers are exposed to the internet at some point, it is not beyond reason that someone's GEM-bearing computer may have been hacked. As you all know, all it takes is ONE person to do it for the data to be released into the wild... And, yes, I saw the word "virtually"..... I should clarify that the case against the person who's using the bogus GEM tracks would be virtually automatic. We know exactly who all of the people are who legitimately have this material. If we see someone with something that looks like a GEM who isn't supposed to have it, that's an easy case. We also have the ability to identify where unauthorized copies came from based on data markers in the files, but not every instance of that is going to be intentional, as you suggest.
|
|
Top |
|
|
MrBoo
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 1:05 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 3:35 am Posts: 1945 Been Liked: 427 times
|
JimHarrington wrote: We also have the ability to identify where unauthorized copies came from based on data markers in the files, but not every instance of that is going to be intentional, as you suggest.
Wouldn't that ability be diminished if they, say, altered the audio version by changing the bit rate?
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 1:36 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
MrBoo wrote: JimHarrington wrote: We also have the ability to identify where unauthorized copies came from based on data markers in the files, but not every instance of that is going to be intentional, as you suggest.
Wouldn't that ability be diminished if they, say, altered the audio version by changing the bit rate? I don't have all the technical details on it, so I don't really know. I don't think so, but it's possible.
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 1:48 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
flees wrote: Jim can you post a list of the songs that are on the 3 extra GEM Disks?? I just ordered mine today and forgot to ask. No, we're not making that information public. Only the people who are eligible to license the bonus discs will have access to the song list for those discs. However, you're welcome to email Customer Care, and we can send you the list.
|
|
Top |
|
|
MrBoo
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 1:50 pm |
|
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 3:35 am Posts: 1945 Been Liked: 427 times
|
JimHarrington wrote: MrBoo wrote: JimHarrington wrote: We also have the ability to identify where unauthorized copies came from based on data markers in the files, but not every instance of that is going to be intentional, as you suggest.
Wouldn't that ability be diminished if they, say, altered the audio version by changing the bit rate? I don't have all the technical details on it, so I don't really know. I don't think so, but it's possible. Thanks! BTW, I may ask questions that you technically don't want to answer sometimes. I am perfectly OK with, "I can't answer that".
|
|
Top |
|
|
doowhatchulike
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 4:53 pm |
|
|
Super Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:35 am Posts: 752 Images: 1 Been Liked: 73 times
|
JimHarrington wrote: flees wrote: Jim can you post a list of the songs that are on the 3 extra GEM Disks?? I just ordered mine today and forgot to ask. No, we're not making that information public. Only the people who are eligible to license the bonus discs will have access to the song list for those discs. However, you're welcome to email Customer Care, and we can send you the list. Just curious: Are you saying that one of the stipulations of receiving these bonus discs is to not publish the names of the songs, specifically in this forum?
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:18 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
doowhatchulike wrote: Just curious: Are you saying that one of the stipulations of receiving these bonus discs is to not publish the names of the songs, specifically in this forum? No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that we're not publicizing the song list. It's a pretty awesome list, though. Some stuff on there that's hard to find.
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2015 5:20 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
I probably worded that poorly originally. I just meant that we're not publishing the list except to our GEM series licensees.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Paradigm Karaoke
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2015 3:53 am |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:24 pm Posts: 5107 Location: Phoenix Az Been Liked: 1279 times
|
JimHarrington wrote: We also have the ability to identify where unauthorized copies came from based on data markers in the files, but not every instance of that is going to be intentional, as you suggest. you don't mean that they could leak it and walk away because they possibly got hacked?
_________________ Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2015 7:27 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
I have NEVER thought paying $150 to have my 38 SC discs certified. I only have ONE CB disc. So, do you think I want to pay for THAT disc to be certified?? I would rather just drop the damn disc.
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2015 8:48 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm Posts: 22978 Songs: 35 Images: 3 Location: Tacoma, WA Been Liked: 2126 times
|
The said certification on CB was a choice and just to register the CB discs with them for nothing.
_________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
Top |
|
|
karaokeniagarafalls
|
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2015 9:22 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 5:39 am Posts: 1735 Images: 12 Location: Niagara Falls, Ontario Canada Been Liked: 190 times
|
mrmarog wrote: Karaoke Croaker wrote: I don't believe that anyone had to match up any files to downsize the 320 GEM tracks to 128 GEM Tracks. MP3GToolz does all of the work for you automatically. Just set it and forget it. Some KJs like to run their shows from a single laptop without having to use an external hard drive....for the same reason that some KJs don't like to use a disc player in their system. It's just one less piece of equipment that can fail during a show. That being said, the average laptop hard drive is only 500GB to 1TB so bit rate can come in to play for some KJs and they can fit many more files on their internal hard drive if the files are ripped at 128 as opposed to 320. I've never run into a single karaoke enthusiast who avoided a particular karaoke show because of the tracks being ripped at 128 instead of 320. The average karaoke singer couldn't tell the difference between Sweet Georgia Brown and Sound Choice. If they have a Sweet Georgia Brown disc at home; then they want to sing the SGB version at a show. Familiarity is much more important to that person than the bit rate of the music. People don't make their karaoke choices by whatever bit rate the KJ has their files stored at. They make those choices based on the fun atmosphere of a particular show. The KJs that have to brag about their bit rate as a selling point usually have nothing else to base their reputation on so they try to make it seem like the bit rate is more important than it really is. When I first starting ripping for my Cavs JB99 in 2000, hard drive capacities were only 80GB. I had acquired almost 1000 discs by that time (I had a friend that owned a retail karaoke store) and 128 was considered the standard bit rate. I spent an exhaustive amount of time getting the graphics as clean as I could and the files spelled accurately and uniformly. As time went on I continued to grow my collection and I stayed with 128. The big improvement was the ripping quality of the error correction software, and the hard drive kept getting larger and cheaper. Were am I going with this: I have never re-ripped more than 2000 discs I own and they are still at 128. I have also never had anyone tell me that one song sounds so much better than another. In a noisy bar it would even be that much more difficult. Over the years some of my original discs that I stored in binders, and stacked on top each other, developed some pin holes because they stuck to the sleeves. Those I cannot re-rip. It simply is not possible or important enough for me to go to 320 on everything I own. I am 65 and my ears are not what they used to be, and my target audience, here in Florida, is my age or older. I will stick with 128 on my old collection and happily carry on. Forgive me for causing any confusion, but... If you have original disks and want to rip them to your computer... would you not want the best quality? Unless your very rich and can afford "That many karaoke songs" to fill even a 500 gb drive would use up around 150,000 songs or more if was 128 bit rate. Seems to me you may have aquired your collection of songs through a third party maybe?
|
|
Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 661 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|