On 13 Jun 2003 at 17:43, Darcy James Argue wrote: > > On Friday, June 13, 2003, at 05:01 PM, David W. Fenton wrote: > > > Well, I've got 6.0. I've not had any problems with it whatsoever. I > > find it annoying to have to constantly be updating things. > > It is kinda annoying but each new point release of QuickTime (6.1, 6.2, > 6.3) has introduced significant enhancements and improvements. (At > least, the Mac version has.)
Well, I don't use anything but the player -- no musical instruments and none of the other junk that goes along with it. I just want it to play QT movies standalone or in the browser. > > Well, > > there are still dropouts, so it must just be Quicktime. > > Ack. That's really too bad. I don't suppose doing a complete > uninstall and then a completely fresh reinstall of QT 6.3 (instead of > upgrading) would help? Well, it might. I don't know if I'll bother. I'm pretty frustrated right now. > > Someone else wrote and suggested WinAmp, but that's infested with > > spyware, as are all the more popular MP3 players, and I simply won't > > abide having those kinds of things installed on my PC. > > Surely there must be some sort of bare-bones freeware MP3 player for PC > that doesn't have all the spyware garbage? . . . I have THREE programs on my PC that can play MP3s. Why should I do the research to find a free MP3 player without spyware? Granted, one doesn't seem to work reliably, and the other two are evil, but it just seems like such a lot of work. > . . . I mean, there are several > of these for Mac, none of which have any spyware, and this despite the > fact that iTunes is so good that there's very little demand for > third-party MP3 solutions. It would be shocking if Windows equivalents > didn't exist. I researched this for a client a while back, and found out that a bunch of the programs claiming to have no spyware actually *do* have it, at least according to LavaSoft's AdAware filters. > > Well, I dont' know exactly how she's doing it. I would expect her to > > be just using the web browser plugin. I know her computer is a G3, > > but it's got OS X (dunno which version), so it may have iTunes. I'll > > suggest it to her. > > She should definitely try opening the files in iTunes if she hasn't > already done so. I suggested that she try that. > >> . . . Your files sound fine to me (apart from the > >> unacceptably low bitrate, IMO). > > > > Well, they don't sound at all unacceptable to me! > > Well, hey, you're the boss... I just mean that 128 kbps is pretty much > considered the minimum standard for MP3s these days. But if it still > sounds good to you at lower bitrates, that's fine too -- just keep in > mind that many people are suspicious of MP3s encoded at anything less > than 128 kbps. (Personally, I think MP3s only start sounding decent at > 192 kpbs and higher.) Maybe you could offer both "lo-fi" and "hi-fi" > versions? I was going to do that, but I realized that my 64bit files were taking up 32MBs of space and figured my ISP would probably complain if I took up four times that! The whole web page may end up on the NYU Music Dept. home page (which is where it belongs, of course), and if that's the case, I may try options. Of course, if the 64bit files are just as bad a download for dialup users as 128bit files, I'd probably not bother. I might, though, then do higher quality files. Did you *really* think the files sounded that bad? Maybe you're expecting the source recording quality to have been better than it was. It was recorded with a small though decent mini-disc player/recorder and minimal mixing through a cheap little mixing board. > >> Incidentally, a Windows version of iTunes should be available before > >> the end of the year, so that would give you another option as far as > >> playback goes. > > > > Well, I like Apple software (though, of course, there was that > > disaster with the QT player UI). > > The UI for iTunes is fantastic. It's one of the best software products > Apple has ever produced. And now there's the iTunes Music Store, which > is (much to my surprise -- I'm very skeptical of music download > services) actually pretty good. Hopefully the PC version will be of > the same high quality. Well, if some day there's ever any music available for download from these legitimate music stores, I may bite, but I don't see that as being at all likely to happen any time soon. -- David W. Fenton http://www.bway.net/~dfenton David Fenton Associates http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
