New Radiohead Album in 10 Days...

[dmakron]

I guess I don’t see how giving away 160kb/s quality music is pissing into open mouths, but whatever.

[ghost_2000]

http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Music/10/10/radiohead.reader.feedback/index.html

[Desmond_The_Family_Berzerker]

Hillarious.
Radiohead, the kings neo-Flyodian, un-progressive, boring, tuneless hipster music. They’ve proven time and time again that they can piss directly into open mouths of hipsters, and they frolic and gargle in the yellow stream like God himself was giving them a nectar-bath. Loathsome pseudo-intellectual college boys used to have ponytails; now they have Radiohead. God help them…

Couldnt disagree with you more.

To each his own I guess.

[dmakron]

Wow. I only wish I had enough time to listen to all of it, but once I’m done with Midterms this week I’ll be all ears.

[drbadgely]

That’s right, 160 kbps. It doesn’t take a techie to tell you that’s a few dozen kbps shy of CD quality.

I’m not concerned about CD quality bitrates - these files are going straight to my ipod.

[bhuji2]

I don’t know much about audio on the internet. Explain to me how the 160 kbps relates to the sample rate or bit depth of the audio. I though kbps relates to the rate of transfer, but that doesn’t necessarily say anything to me about the actual quality of the audio.

[El_Bastarde]

Yeah, I love music snobs who whine because the music quality isn’t 100% mega super quality. Who cares! If you can hear the song, then the quality is fine. This isn’t HD TV here.

And seriously, I can understand paying a penny for a Radiohead album because that’s about how much it’s worth anyway (cymbal crash)

Stevo