Its just one result of music in this day and age. The barrier and cost of entry into the music making world has been lowered tremendously for everyone so where as before there was arguable quality control now it's about making music and with that submissions of files at that bitrate or even lower. The people sourcing the music just wanna get the music out and if that is how the file is exported and released then that is just what was provided to be worked with.

What will said. ^^^^

Im glad Im not the only one who noticed this. I was seeing a bunch of these and thought, you know I never get the better version Id better catch up. So I went back like a year and lo and behold still no better version

reason number 345,678,000 not to play new hiphop

sounds all muddy and shit like that OG Maco -Bitch U guessed it

was terrible quality

Is it all the remixed/twerk/hype/uptempo/downtempo/redrum/transition/blahblahblah tracks or are these the original songs as well. I used to be a member of DJ City but i am now wondering of my other sites now.

Hey guys,

I'm the National Director of DJcity. This quote is accurate. We source our files directly from the labels however sometimes (and increasingly so) they only supply 192 files initially. As one of the biggest suppliers of music to working DJs, we have to decide whether the necessity of having the new music first outweighs having a lower quality version. This is done on a case by case basis and as the initial post indicated, we always make a note that the file is 192 and we always update with better versions once they become available. hope this helps.




yup and tons of other hip hop too. all of mustard's early stuff was terrible but we have no control over how these guys master and mix their music.

if you guys have any other questions feel free to ask or email me directly ( styles @ djcity .com)

originals

So a 192kbs source is received, edits are made and then the file is reencoded back to 192kbs? Would it be better to covert the source to wav or aiff, do the edit and then save as wav or aiff and post so you don't lose further quality?

Why don't the monkeys that make the music just click the 320kbps button? They know how to click everything else on they compootahs when they're making the track... smh.

if you work direct with labels, and labels have access to orig files, and you have contact with said labels, why not say, 'i want this on my site, but i cant put it up til you send me at 320 minimum?

i see a lot of the same files on djservicepack, soundcloud, etc at the same bit rate(for free) that dj city offers for money.

They do centralize the music for you. The connivence is worth something. Also hard to play a track if you don't know it exist. It's hard to keep up with 100 different soundcloud accounts although it is part of the job.

Not just hip hop I have house tunes and intro edits that report as 320 mp3s but do not sound right to my ears.

The best discription of some is that they sound lifeless and flat.

Stuff like deep house can be tedious enough but when the sound quality is not there it's even worse.
Not pointing the finger in any particular direction,I've even had promos direct from record companys that sound not right.

Not complaining, I love your service BUT I rarely if ever have seen a file actually updated

here's a link to our track updates page: www.djcity.com

Remastered means that we replaced the lower quality version with the higher one. You can also see when additional versions are added here.

very rarely are any of the file remastered then.

but like someone said it is worth it being an aggregator of many sites and files. its really the only site i recommend, but there are other reasons for that i wont discuss.

In this day and age how in the hell does a label send out 192 files? It only takes a click to send a 320 or lossless. Sad shit

+1... we both agree.

It's past time for lossy encoding to die.

Honestly I wish it had never been invented.

because labels dont care about quality they care about quantity its obviouse

yea, wouldn't want those labels running out of MP3s...

Lol yeah they probably attribute some cost saving to the lower bit rate haha.

lol

nm

Im sure some idiot has convinced labels of this smh

I suppose if you're paying for specific amounts of bandwidth, and doing stupid stuff like "distributing" music via email attachments sent to hundreds/thousands of recipients, the difference between 192k and 320k (or, God forbid, any flavor of lossless encoding) might be significant.

If DJ's actually care about sound quality, the correct approach is to demand an end to lossy encoding entirely.

Naw... you're putting your money-making product out to the world; you should present the best product feasibly possible. Them placing a lower bitrate track out there is dumb because thousands of DJ's are now adding your lower quality product to their library and playing that lower quality over sound systems and radio. Just choose the 320k option and click send...

Labels are still looking at it as if they are loosing sales if they give high quality...

LoL, true but baby steps...

(Real) DJs don't "buy" disposable music - that's why we join Record/Music pools - lol

The consumer of disposable "hot garbage" rap could care less if it a 192 or a 320....

Maybe Styles D can answer...
How many/percentage of DJCity tracks come via email?

My buddy runs a label (House/Techno - Beatport type shit) and he uses Fatdrop out if the uk - link via email - you have to rate before download, tracked via cookies and your email addy

I'd honestly rather have a choice. Sometimes I get slightly pissed when I get serviced a underground track and it is a Wav file.

I think "Is this shit gonna be HOT ENOUGH" to warrant taking up 60-150mb of drive space???? lol

Traxsource has a good method - you can upgrade previous purchases to Wav or AIFF for .75¢ if you want a lossless version (archive lossless versions of classics or for playing on "big systems").

Can't say I would want EVERY Hot garbage Rap or R&B tune as a Wav or lossless?

Curious about what others think? Would you like Pools to service Wav files or Lossless?

At this point in the game it should be all lossless. It costs nothing to export it that way. Hot garbage or not.

Aren't the record labels the same ones who supply Itunes? I'm just trying to clarify why Itunes gets the 320 and DJ "Pools"are getting 192kbps.

iTunes is actually 256k AAC, arguably superior to 320k MP3. My ears tell me so anyway.

There is NO good reason why in 2015, the labels (and DJ pools) (and iTunes for that matter) don't offer lossless audio.

Lossy encoding has perpetrated a huge chain of audio shit, it's proven to be a dangerous and destructive tool in the hands of the ignorant.

At least AAC (iTunes) is a far superior lossy codec than MP3, but even there it's ridiculous that in 2015 there's no lossless (ALAC) options offered.

It could be that Apple has rules about material submitted and record pools don't. They're happy making you pay for shitty music.

nm

this

So perhaps there's room for a new DJ pool that would be happy making you pay for non-shitty music.

I've asked numerous times recently about any pools offering lossless/LPCM audio, and the only response I got was Promo Only.

A major problem I have with all the pools I know about that do editing/redrums/whatever is that they're probably using lossy files as source material, then re-encoding them as lossy. So the DJ's are being serviced with audio that has already been degraded by at least two steps of lossy encoding.

at some level you can blame pools, but its the record companies that suck. from time to time people artists/producers direct send me lo quality files and i say i wont play 128 files.

kinda sucks because there are quite a few songs that i would play if they werent 128/192 or a bad redrum/intro edit. only if something is major hit and i cant find it in any other form, which does happen from time to time, but i generally wait.

From a logistics point of view - pools get hundreds if not thousands of tracks each month and usually retain srvicable copies for about 3 years or so

That is a lot of storage and bandwidth

Would you pay double or quadruple dues for lossless?

Come on now. Companies pay for unlimited storage and bandwidth nowadays.

That was a lame excuse - unless of course they're running shit off their mom's basement.

nm

This and their job is to provide storage & bandwith, That's just overhead..the cost to do business.

Yep I said that over a year ago, and unfortunately no sign of anything different there.

I mean a pool can try to offer lossless, but it's dependent on the labels supplying the tunes in lossless. Most won't and there are still some backwards labels that just want to supply 192 or lower.

this