ABUSE FORM
Randi Tytingvåg - Red (2009) [Ozella Music]
Posted By :
mgrcin
|
Date :
28 Sep 2010 06:16:56
|
Comments :
16
|
|
Randi Tytingvåg - Red (2009) [Ozella Music] {Audiophile 44.1/24}
Studio Master | FLACs (24bit/44,1kHz) | cover -> 531 MB (+5% RAR rec.)
Jazz / Vocal
Studio Master | FLACs (24bit/44,1kHz) | cover -> 531 MB (+5% RAR rec.)
Jazz / Vocal
| “ | A truly captivating album, from a singer being hailed as a jazz great in the making. A showcase of a unique jazz voice and enchanting orignal compositions - plus a sparkling Cole Porter standard thrown in for good measure - from an artist gifted in the nuance of cross-genre influenced writing, yet with the confidence to make her own jazz performance stand tall. | ” |
Musicians:
Randi Tytingvåg - vocals
Anders Aarum - piano, rhodes, glockenspiel, pipa (#1), rebaba, percussion & programming
Espen Leite - accordion
Svante Henryson - cello
Jens Fossum - double bass, pipa (#3, 9), er-hu, backing vocals & guitar
Jan Martin Smørdal - guitars #5, 10
Ivar Thormodsæter - perc, dr. #3, 4, 9, 10 & 11
Eirik-André Rydningen - percussion, drums #2,8
Håvard Fossum - sax & clarinet #3
Tracklisting:
1. Red Or Dead
2. Quiet Noise
3. My Heart Belongs To Daddy
4. Queen & King
5. Why
6. Mr. Barn
7. Song For Alice
8. Cohesion
9. Big In China
10. How Can You Know?
11. A Trip To The Moon
Total Time: 00:49:11
listen and compare!
no mirror please!
check my blog
| ADVERTISING » | High Speed Download | « ADVERTISING |
Recent searches:

Am I the only one who hears distortions, e.g. track 1 sounds overmodulated from 01.33 onward. I dl'ed the files twice from HF (and once from rutracker; they are identical).
1 & 2, either from overmodulation or careless rip from
some external media. Also audible click on track 4, ugh!
Sorry I wasted the bandwidth...especially after this
uploader's click-ridden Herbie Hancock "hires" post.
Live & learn...:[
24/44.1 format is a significant improvement in sound quality compared to 16/44.1. The increase of bits in the wordlenght is as important as the sample rate for better quality, that was proven by serious studies (google search : "wordlenght")......
I believe that we don't have the same definition of the word "high-res".
You think that the only parameter which defines "high-res" is the number of samples per second, and not the number of bits.
On the contrary I think that the number of bits is as important as the sample rate to define "high-res" stuff.
CD quality is "16 bits/44.1 KHz". Thus for me a "24 bits/44.1 KHz" is in facts high-res....... ;-)
In addition, I believe that the most important thing is that people are honest and don't upload tampered files.
Alas, on this level, it seems that certain people here on Avax are not highly reliable......(see the post "Portico Quartet", where the 24/48 original files have been downsampled to 24/44.1, and merged into one big file, with a crappy cue file. Why ?)
Btw I don't know the "rutracker" stuff......
Peace and cheers !
Did it ever occur to either of you -- resolution issues aside -- that this "album" is pure shite...hi/mid/lo res or otherwise. Other than compulsive idiots that download anything and everything, why would anyone want these wacko posts?!?!?!?
"24/44.1 is non-high-res it's cd-quality... "
Sorry, you're wrong. CDs are 16 bit, not 24. 24-bit is a significant improvement.
And re. quality: Why bother about bit and sampling rates if you don't HEAR the difference? A discussion about technical facts that you aren't even able to hear is ridiculous.
What concerns me are the damaged files posted here - and I don't read a word about it. Have you listened to these at all? I have already deleted all of them because they sound so awfully overmodulated.
1) Who said that I don't hear any difference between 16 bits or 24 bits ?
Of course I hear a difference ! Read my comment : "24/44.1 format is a significant improvement in sound quality compared to 16/44.1"
2) You don't see any word about damaged files ?
I have written : "In addition, I believe that the most important thing is that people are honest and don't upload tampered files."
Please read carefully all the comments before talking......
3) Overmodulated. You mean brickwalled (compressed) audio files ? That's a major problem in the audio industry since many years. For CDs and High-Res. So if one wants to listen to some music, he doesn't really have the choice.
4) You criticize jamal66 because he says that he doesn't like the music shared on avaxhome, and after you say that you deleted all the files shared here ! Please don't contradict yourself.....
5) AND FOR ALL PEOPLE : PLEASE READ ALL COMMENTS, AND USE YOUR BRAIN BEFORE OPENING THE MOUTH !!!!!
> 1-2: I was thinking aloud about the majority of comments here, (especially) not about yours.
> 3: The problem is not file compression. The files sound awfully distorted, which has nothing to do with compression.
> 4: I deleted the files that I liked a lot (musically speaking) because of their unbearable acoustic deficiencies.
So, please don't impute to others that they don't use their brain etc. when you're just doing the same.
okease go away... or blow yourself up