EDIT: In case it was not clear: please post music to songs you own the rights (aka your own music)
In the interest of clarity, I would ask that all posts to this forum use the following format for the subject:
[Song Genre] Song Title (file format) short comments
Therefore, a new trance song posted called "TranceyDance" that is in MP3 format should have the following subject:
[Trance] TranceyDance (MP3) Cool Trance Song
This will make it much easier for visitors to find music that they are interested in. Thanks in advance for your co-operation!
Please dedicate one song per topic, instead of putting all your work in one.
If you want to post an album or EP (eg. a group of songs that are part of a whole) please start your topic with [ALBUM] or [EP] then if possible [STYLE] (unless the style throughout the album varies too much)
Note that all posts in this forum that are not conform rules are either adjusted or deleted (depending on how bad they are)
The subject-tags [genre] and (file format) are useful, as long as the files are original modules, like .xm or .it.
So the offered downloads are directly tracker-based. But what if the download is a compressed audio-file.
An mp3- or ogg-file can't contain proof any more, that it has been made tracker-based. Source could be FL or some mikes.
So I have to trust the integrity of the posters that the source of the song is strictly tracker-based.
On the other hand, maybe some of the members are 'hybrid' composers, using tracker techniques, but also a sequencer like Reason, or analog electronics with a microphone. This asks for an extra category about the source of the file.
This can be realized by renaming 'short comment' in the subject format to 'Song Source'.
( Comments, short or not, can be added anyway, if a member posts a link to a download. )
If 'Song Source' is generally a tracker-based one, the item could be skipped, as a valid indication too.
Non-tracker information can be given there.
The way I see it, if it comes from a regular here, you can safely assume it's tracked. If it's a newcomer with an MP3 claiming it's tracked, theres no way to find out. Especially if it uses commercial samples and cant be redistributed. Or worse yet, uses a commercial (no demo) tracker (cant think of any, but I guess they exist). Then there is really no way of proving anything.
If we really want to go hardcore and rule out all non-tracked files, then remove non-tracked file formats.
There are people here that don't track anymore but use sequencers. They submit their songs as MP3. Why restrict them? Its the music, stupid!
A very nice way to quote modplug's old quote :)
And maybe it's good to remember that quite a proportion of tracks made even with Modplug Tracker cannot practically be distributed as module files due to use of vst's, big samples etc.
Quote from: "Squirrel Havoc"If we really want to go hardcore and rule out all non-tracked files, then remove non-tracked file formats.
Logical consequence. But, as LPChip, I see no reason to go that far, so that's why I brought this up, because I like more clarity if things get fuzzy. This can be easily given by mentioning the source, the tool, used while making the composition itself.
Made with ModPlug or Rebirth is important data to have a clear view on the skills being used by the composer, according to the advantages and restrictions of the tool involved.
2 LPChip
I know, its the music, stupid! :)
But there is quite a difference between offering a file in the native tracker-format like mod, xm or it, or distributing the result of some conversion in an ogg-file or on an audio-cd.
If one has a downloaded tracker file, one can not only listen to the final composition, but one can also see how it's done.
Not to mention all kinds of exact control over the final playback. With an emp3 that's quite impossible.
2 Relabsoluness
Good point. So I skip my previous idea of not using the default 'tracker' term as a source-tag. It can be significant data too, if the output format is inevitable a non-native one, like a .wav-file, to be able to distribute the piece.
Rules changed:
If you want to group certain songs together, like an album or EP, its now allowed to make a post with these songs together. Note that you will then receive feedback to the entire collection, and not just the songs themselves. If you do so, add [ALBUM] or [EP] to the beginning of your title's post.
Also, do not group certain songs to be an album if you just want to quickly get it over with. Poor usage of time in these matters will probably result in the wrong kind of feedback. Spamming your music just to get heard is never a good way if done improperly.
The difference between albums and just a list of tracks, is the concept of the publication.
One constructs an album according to some concept. The order of the tracks tells the story.
The smallest album is the vinyl single-format with side A and B, and then the EP with ~ four tracks.
Playing back all files of some folder just from the first file until the last is a portfolio, not a composition.
Thanks! :D
Ok!
May we re-post tracks we've significantly updated from long ago?
Sure. Preferably with a link to the original for comparison of course. ;)