Discussion about a feature I'd like to add to the new site.

[LPChip]

The new site will ofcource allow you to submit music.

People ofcource have found that the community changed too much due to the fact that people submit too much songs in MP3 format. The good old "peak to learn" method is usually not possible on the better songs anymore.

To counteract this, I've though about the following.

You may only have equally or less MP3's on MODPlug as you have modules. It will be possible to submit a song as MP3 and also give a second link to the source module. Doing so will give a point for the module, but not for the mp3. (the mp3 is bonus here)

So: if you submit a song that has both a module and an mp3, you're allowed to submit a song as MP3 only.

Do you agree that this should be there? (and don't give me a no because you intend to only submit mp3!)

The poll will last for 14 days. please vote before then.

[Squirrel Havoc]

I said I agree, because looking at mod source is how I got started, and I always felt bad that new people had to go without that, since everything is mp3 now a days

[shableep]

yah, i totally agree. except i think it should maybe even be more strict. where  if you submit a mod, THEN you can submit the mp3 version... as a bonus.

and i'm probably the dood that would submit just the mp3. so i guess i'm saying, don't let guys like me get away with it.

[victimofconspiracy]

I voted no. Even you, LPChip, said here:

If I make a chiptune, I'll always give the source, unless it was made using VSTi's. I also take into account if the mastered MP3 version sounds better or not. If i can make a better sounding MP3 while the source song is really small, I'd probably share both. Usually my big songs end up with 15~25mb each with commercial VST's attached to them. Giving the source here is just impossible.

"Giving the source here  is just impossible."

The source to all of my songs is at least  10-20+mb. Many people, like myself, are still using dial-up. It takes long enough to upload an mp3, let alone my source. This would mean, many of us couldn't share our music at all.

[LPChip]

I voted no. Even you, LPChip, said here:

If I make a chiptune, I'll always give the source, unless it was made using VSTi's. I also take into account if the mastered MP3 version sounds better or not. If i can make a better sounding MP3 while the source song is really small, I'd probably share both. Usually my big songs end up with 15~25mb each with commercial VST's attached to them. Giving the source here is just impossible.

"Giving the source here  is just impossible."

The source to all of my songs is at least  10-20+mb. Many people, like myself, are still using dial-up. It takes long enough to upload an mp3, let alone my source. This would mean, many of us couldn't share our music at all.

Im sure it would be possible to make a selection of your songs and use techniques to make it very small to submit. There are always compo's and co-ops which will require modules only. they can be submitted too. You can even submit the mp3 version which is HQ, and put in your remarks that you'd rather have them to listen to the mp3 version and give feedback upon it.

[LPChip]

yah, i totally agree. except i think it should maybe even be more strict. where  if you submit a mod, THEN you can submit the mp3 version... as a bonus.

and i'm probably the dood that would submit just the mp3. so i guess i'm saying, don't let guys like me get away with it.

Nah, Sometimes its just impossible to release the source. Therefore: for every mp3, you need to have atleast one module too, where combo's are seen as modules.

[cyperkid]

though i am not that fanatic i am just asking (well, i little bit late and maybe old-fashioned at all)
why allowing mp3 at all...
i am wondering since years: is it just because someone's afraid that his/her samples are ripped off and their ideas stolen? or are they afraid of transparency?

definitly pro modules!

[LPChip]

though i am not that fanatic i am just asking (well, i little bit late and maybe old-fashioned at all)
why allowing mp3 at all...
i am wondering since years: is it just because someone's afraid that his/her samples are ripped off and their ideas stolen? or are they afraid of transparency?

definitly pro modules!

Like me, some people are mixing/mastering their songs. This creates a song with high quality. Next, when I'm tracking in special genres, I'm easilly get a simple module up to 15~25 mb. This is so huge, that I can't put it on the net. The mp3 file is alot smaller, which gets my preference.

[cyperkid]

Like me, some people are mixing/mastering their songs. This creates a song with high quality. Next, when I'm tracking in special genres, I'm easilly get a simple module up to 15~25 mb. This is so huge, that I can't put it on the net. The mp3 file is alot smaller, which gets my preference.

of course  :wink:
same here.
at least my xm-files mostly would be smaller than mp3s.

[MisterX]

though i am not that fanatic i am just asking (well, i little bit late and maybe old-fashioned at all)
why allowing mp3 at all...
i am wondering since years: is it just because someone's afraid that his/her samples are ripped off and their ideas stolen? or are they afraid of transparency?

Several reasons:

File Size: Many new tracks can be well above 10MB.

Sound Quality: Releasing in MP3/OGG allows for mastering of the track.

Playback Consistency: No extra VSTis or VSTs needed for the song to play back as the artist intended.

There is nothing that prevents artists from tracking "old skool" with just samples, and trying to keep the file size as small as possible.  There is still an art in that, but at the same time, there should be nothing preventing artists who want their songs to sound as good as they can be either.

[Snu]

ill have to vote a no, unless mpt's new format allows vsts to be included in the song...
it might be a good idea in theory, but i see several problems with it:

1) i have no problem with distributing my 'sources', but the issues of included vsts and huge samples (and dialup...) prevent me from sharing the sources to most of my songs, and i think this is the case with a lot of people here.
2) if we started restricting mp3s, i think our site traffic, and number of artists would drop dramatically, not only because of #1, but also because a lot of people nowdays are LOOKING for mp3s when they look for free music.
3) there are already sites that cater to the module files only niche (ie, modarchive).
4) i think that mpc should match the spirit and abilities of mpt, and mpt is a 'modern' tracker that has great emphasis on vsts (and growing all the time with the new versions).

that being said, i have no problem with 'emphasising' module only composing... like if mpc hosts songs, only modules would be hosted, or maybe some form of preference would be given to module releases in the rating system.  but i dont think its a good idea to restrict the community in such a way as this...

another possibility might be to have two sections to the site, the standard music section, and an 'open source' section.

i will hold off on voting for now however, until i hear some more arguments on both sides.

[Sam_Zen]

Mp32Ogg in the first place..
This is about filesizes on the MPT-server, so about efficiency of reproduction.
I would say that the priority here is the other way around :
Upload only the basic modules in tracker-format and, if needed, add a link there to your own website to a compressed audio-version.

[rncekel]

I wonder if it could be possible that every song has a double link, one for the ready-to-be-heard version (mp3 or ogg) and another for the source, more or less deprived of its samples and with references to the VSTs needed, to make it of a reasonable size and yet useful to learn how it was made.

[LPChip]

I wonder if it could be possible that every song has a double link, one for the ready-to-be-heard version (mp3 or ogg) and another for the source, more or less deprived of its samples and with references to the VSTs needed, to make it of a reasonable size and yet useful to learn how it was made.

Yeah, this has been planned to happen.

In fact, I've been thinking in allowing several links for streamed music so you can allow a HQ version 129 bitrate and higher or LQ version 128 bitrate and lower. This way you can search for HQ music only etc.

[LPChip]

ill have to vote a no, unless mpt's new format allows vsts to be included in the song...
it might be a good idea in theory, but i see several problems with it:

1) i have no problem with distributing my 'sources', but the issues of included vsts and huge samples (and dialup...) prevent me from sharing the sources to most of my songs, and i think this is the case with a lot of people here.
2) if we started restricting mp3s, i think our site traffic, and number of artists would drop dramatically, not only because of #1, but also because a lot of people nowdays are LOOKING for mp3s when they look for free music.
3) there are already sites that cater to the module files only niche (ie, modarchive).
4) i think that mpc should match the spirit and abilities of mpt, and mpt is a 'modern' tracker that has great emphasis on vsts (and growing all the time with the new versions).

that being said, i have no problem with 'emphasising' module only composing... like if mpc hosts songs, only modules would be hosted, or maybe some form of preference would be given to module releases in the rating system.  but i dont think its a good idea to restrict the community in such a way as this...

another possibility might be to have two sections to the site, the standard music section, and an 'open source' section.

i will hold off on voting for now however, until i hear some more arguments on both sides.

As long as the VST (i)'s are not commercial, its okay. Perhaps a link (or more) to the VST(i) source files is a good idea. Note that the new MPT will allow you to search KVRAudio for missing plugins.