Music Industry Goons

Jesse, Cory, RJ, Camby, Redstorm, Odracir, etc. etc.

Do any of you download music using torrents?

Right on. I have some fairly hard-to-get invites to one of the top music torrent sites on the internetz. However, unless you're going to actually use it, it would be best not to accept it. They disable accounts that don't sustain a certain ratio or are dormant for an extended period of time. So you would have to be somewhat active. The benefits are certainly there if you are into using torrents.

If you aren't very particular about the quality of music, which most of us--including myself--are not, then you are correct. But there are many benefits otherwise to having an account at what. For instance:

1. When you find the album you want, you have the option to download it in one of several different formats. For example, the Zombie EP by The Devil Wears Prada will yield the following results:



This is just an example, there are other formats in addition to these, such as ogg Vorbis (whatever the hell that is). And in the event of a reissue, the same will apply. But these types of particulars will not be important to the average user who just wants a copy, and for it to sound "good".

2. The quality of the music is near perfect. Any known glitch in the release is deleted and reuploaded.

3. The speed is completely maximized. I download at about 1.5mb/s (which is my cap). Unlike most torrent sites where there is a lack of willing uploaders when compared to the "leechers", at what, it is the opposite. Users are desperate to upload. So when you find what you want, it's likely to be 100/1 upload to download ratio. The downside to this, unfortunately, is that it's actually quite difficult to seed anything which affects your data ratio.

4. You wont have to worry about broken links. Sometimes there will only be a half-dozen uploaders to what you want, but it is almost always there.

5. They have applications in addition to music. It is hardly the focal point of the website, but you will usually find what you want, virus-free, at what.

6. They have bundles of music that either are not found at other http sites or would be difficult to download at such sites. For example, I downloaded the entire Beatles discography (the one released through iTunes) in both mono and stereo.

7. The request system is much more effecient than at any other site. Again, people want nothing more than to upload something to you. That is of course, aside from getting music for themselves.

I could probably go on, but I think you get the point. Does any of this really matter? Not to the average user. To be completely honest, I probably get more from IL; because one thing is certain, what is not really a place to discover music, because there is really no direction. When I think of something I want and don't feel like spending too much time on it, I use what and I have the album about 2 minutes after the thought enters my mind.

In conclusion, I'm not trying to sell you guys on joining, rather I want you to atleast understand that this isn't the average torrent site. Like I said before, if you wouldn't frequently use the site, then there is no point in accepting the invitation. But if this is something that you're truely interested in, then let me know and I'll hook you up.

Precisely.

Damn they completely revamped the layout today. Looks kinda cheesy. Anyways, to those who I hooked up, there is a BIG freeleech going on right now. Perfect time you load up on the upload credit so you can download whatever you want in the future without worrying too much about your ratio.

If no one is seeding a torrent it gets automatically deleted and eventually re-uploaded, where it will be picked up by a bunch of seedboxes and other users. And the "month old" idea is prevalent on public trackers, not sites like what where it remains active for long time. I'm assuming we're talking about indie music, not mainstream, which stays active forever.

As for everything you said about FLAC, all true.

Lol @ who the fuck uses torrents; who the fuck doesn't use torrents? I'll tell you, people who are left to download from the likes of thepiratebay, and even Demonoid, OR people who don't fully understand how private torrent sites operate. A perfect example is your next statement: "Another drawback is you can't completely see what your downloading". Fact of the matter is, it is against the rules to compress any files at what. What this means is, when you download a torrent, everything is visible at the point when you confirm the download, down to the .nfo file and artwork (which you can choose not to include in the bundle). You can download the torrent of an album, pick 3 songs from it, and leave the rest behind. Can you do this at any http site? Absolutely not. In fact, http sites are a prime example of not being able to see exactly what you're downloading.

The torrent sites I am speaking of are the essence of "trusted", comrade. Again, I am not talking about sites like thepiratebay, mininova, or even low-grade private trackers like Demonoid. I am refering to the major, TOP trackers on the internet. You are talking about something completely different. I would rather rent a movie from blockbuster than download from the low-level trackers you speak of. Moving forward..

To answer your question "Can you really see the dimensions/aspect ratio, sound source, fps, format, bit rate etc (same with music's bit/sample rate, channels, compression etc"

Absolutely. Now since what.cd doesn't have movies, I will use another tracker "revolution" as an example here. I went to the site and the first movie I clicked on is a Black Swan DVDSCR. Here is some of the info contained in the post:

General
Complete name: Black.Swan.2010.DVDSCR.XVID.AC3.HQ.Hive-CM8.avi
Format : AVI
Format/Info: Audio Video Interleave
File size: 1.40 GiB
Duration : 1h 47mn
Overall bit rate : 1 867 Kbps
Writing application: Nandub v1.0rc2
Writing library: Nandub build 1853/release

Video
ID : 0
Format : MPEG-4 Visual
Format profile : Advanced Simple@L5
Format settings, BVOP: Yes
Format settings, QPel: Yes
Format settings, GMC : No warppoints
Format settings, Matrix: Default (H.263)
Muxing mode: Packed bitstream
Codec ID : XVID
Codec ID/Hint: XviD
Duration : 1h 47mn
Bit rate : 1 599 Kbps
Width: 700 pixels
Height : 292 pixels
Display aspect ratio : 2.35:1
Frame rate : 29.970 fps
Color space: YUV
Chroma subsampling : 4:2:0
Bit depth: 8 bits
Scan type: Progressive
Bits/(Pixel*Frame) : 0.261
Stream size: 1.20 GiB (86%)
Writing library: XviD 1.2.1 (UTC 2008-12-04)

Audio
ID : 1
Format : AC-3
Format/Info: Audio Coding 3
Mode extension : CM (complete main)
Codec ID : 2000
Duration : 1h 47mn
Bit rate mode: Constant
Bit rate : 256 Kbps
Channel(s) : 2 channels
Channel positions: Front: L R
Sampling rate: 48.0 KHz
Bit depth: 16 bits
Video delay: 31ms
Stream size: 197 MiB (14%)
Alignment: Split accross interleaves
Interleave, duration : 33 ms (1.00 video frame)
Interleave, preload duration : 500 ms​

This is the way it is for every movie.

What you've written here is a clear case of a straw man fallacy as none of it applies to either what.cd or revolution. You are basing these assumptions on experiences you've had at mediocre (at best) trackers. The torrent sites I've gone over are excellent at everything you've brought up. The torrents contain every bit of information you need, with respect to both music and movies. Whats more, each torrent is loaded with feedback on the quality of the download. Now to answer your last question, "You do know I've used torrents and http sites extensively right?"

One word, ambiguity. You may have used sites like isohunt extensively, but from what I have gathered, you have never used a site like what.cd or revolution. There is just no way.

Breh, you see much less of what you're downloading when you use links. You are left with what the uploader and those who have downloaded the file are telling you about it. With torrents you have that plus the ability to see the files within the torrent.

Smh. What you've written here is the equivalent of saying "I choose Honda Civic over Lamborghini because the Civic is fast and looks sporty". Seriously, none of what you said applies to the sites I'm talking about.

Neither do I.

"The speed is completely maximized. I download at about 1.5mb/s (which is my cap). Unlike most torrent sites where there is a lack of willing uploaders when compared to the "leechers", at what, it is the opposite."

I clearly stated that people are desperate to upload (thus, seeds) and that I max out my connection because of the abundance of uploaders. How you came back with "slow download time" and "no seeders" baffles me.

Look, this is not about torrents vs. http, because both can be very advantageous; this is about you, as well as some others on here, not comprehending the difference between [top] private and public trackers. If I went to IWILLSEARCH4U.com and then told you "hey http sites suck, period." wouldn't you feel inclined to explain to me how that is a terrible site/example as compared to what respected http sites are? In all honesty, even though this thread is based on a music torrent site, I have already admitted that I get most of my music from an http site.

I've been a member at warez-bb for almost 3 years now and while I do like the site--and sometimes still use it--there are just some things that I find annoying. For instance, most movies are broken down into like 10-20 (sometimes more) RS links, and there is no such thing as a dupe. And most of the single file links are on free sites where the max speed is about a third of what I can achieve elsewhere. But to each their own, I find nothing wrong with someone choosing that site over all else.

When I first joined the site I could not understand how in the fuck to seed anything. First I started downloading torrents from the "Top 10" which barely helped, then I started downloading torrents the instant they hit, which worked a little better. But freeleech is where it's at. Becaise of it, I don't have to worry about shit!

Up: 57.94 GB Down: 2.76 GB Ratio: 22.XX