A request for the netlabels in general!!.

Zero:onE · Post by **Zero:onE** » Sat May 26, 2007 5:51 am

Sorry person I don't really understand what you want to say! I m cool with your request, try getting along with yourself though! I know that you don't get any money from your blog but if it wasn't free (netlabels) would you do it?

_minimalnet_ · Post by **_minimalnet_** » Sat May 26, 2007 6:02 am

My english is bad but with attention it is possible to understand.

Answering: No, I would not do this for a payment label, the music of the guns of my signature does not need the publicity of any blog. The only reason for which MinimalNet exists is to help to a movement with which I fell in love a long year ago.

As I was commenting in my blog some time ago... the term "netlabel" takes impliedly a series of values that do not happen in another type of label, words as generosity, altruism, romanticism, rebelliousness …, words that in nowadays seems utopics but that for against, as if a miracle, in the netlabels is a reality.

It is incredible that in the full XXIst century and in an absolutely capitalist society it is when a movement as this one has been born and this is what really makes it magic.

For these reasons I love the netlabels, netlabel not is only a free music, this movement it is much deeper than that.

Reduce all this to free music is not to know what means the netlabel concept.

revy · Post by **revy** » Sat May 26, 2007 2:26 pm

_minimalnet_ wrote: As I was commenting in my blog some time ago... the term "netlabel" takes impliedly a series of values that do not happen in another type of label, words as generosity, altruism, romanticism, rebelliousness …, words that in nowadays seems utopics but that for against, as if a miracle, in the netlabels is a reality.

to me this seems a bit of a fantasy...i can see your points but its a bit of a stretch for me

I love netlabels very much but maybe a step back into reality...

what is sharing these sounds? a forum for self-expression...maybe for some a method of self-promotion...or a way to communicate thoughts...or maybe just out of boredom.

and lets think more about feelings and less about filesystems. id rather lose myself in the bleeps and clicks than fret about what folder its in

_minimalnet_ · Post by **_minimalnet_** » Sat May 26, 2007 2:45 pm

revy wrote: what is sharing these sounds? a forum for self-expression...maybe for some a method of self-promotion...or a way to communicate thoughts...or maybe just out of boredom.

I do not think nobody mounts a netlabel by boredom.

And yes, I see romanticism in the netlabels, perhaps it is only my fantasy, I prefer thinking that not... because this romantic side is that hooked me to this movement.

I understand that a musician can see this in a different way, he waits for other things, other illusions (publish a vinyl, for example), but I am not musician nor artist nor dj, in my case this no contributes me nothing physical, nor publicity, nor promotion, perhaps for this reason I can see a romantic side in this movement.

shamankick · Post by **shamankick** » Sun May 27, 2007 2:56 pm

for lazzy releaser, to generate differents cover size
you can use a gallery feature which is
resizing image by using imagemagick or gd libraries

you upload the big sized one and the php do the rest.

about name of your track, same as mister Cotumo,
and please NO space (ex: 01 my track.mp3)
it's very boring to have to rename all your tracks.

last but not least, NO VBR , and 192 bitrate minimum

bordel !!

choenyi · Post by **choenyi** » Mon May 28, 2007 4:30 am

Wow, that was minimal.

Anyway, I agree that if ID tags were all filled out, and if all filenames were cat#_track#_artist_title, it would be grand. I would not lose tracks and have no idea where they'd come from. Mostly I'm behind w/ being current w/ new releases because I have to rename almost all tracks & edit tags before I dump them to the external drive, because I don't want to lose them ... and have no idea where they came from ... maybe that would actually be more minimal

If this type detail slipped the mind, the mind is still grand [[[OK no offense OK]]] but I do fully agree

fully

choenyi · Post by **choenyi** » Mon May 28, 2007 4:30 am

I don't think it's unfair or unfriendly to suggest a protocol as to this

choenyi · Post by **choenyi** » Mon May 28, 2007 4:33 am

Er, sorry I jumped in at the end of page 1 and the first post makes no sense to explicit responsive context

But I agree to the last post 192 at least!
I raise the bar no less than 256 please! Why not?