RE: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread Paul Hudson
The thing which annoys me is that the clips are so short! How can you tell what something is like from 30 seconds? I rely on the clips quite a bit now as I rarely get to go into town any more and find hearing new music difficult. Anyway, great service from their mail order apart from that.

Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread robin
it's a RIAA/BPI thing, any longer and technically they're in breach of licensing or something. rediculous i know. robin... Paul Hudson wrote: The thing which annoys me is that the clips are so short! How can you tell what something is like from 30 seconds? I rely on the clips quite a bit

(313) Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread Tristan Watkins
- Original Message - From: robin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Paul Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 313@Hyperreal.Org 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 3:23 PM Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: (313) retroactive 002 it's a RIAA/BPI thing, any longer and technically they're in breach

Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread robin
it's a RIAA/BPI thing, You sure? I'd like to see that. I would think any sample in excess of say, 3 seconds would be unauthorised unless there are explicit differneces set out for record shops. Meanwhile, anyone know how most other online shops get away with longer samples? Juno

(313) Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread Tristan Watkins
Original Message - From: robin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tristan Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 313@Hyperreal.Org 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 3:46 PM Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: (313) retroactive 002 it's a RIAA/BPI thing, You sure? I'd like to see that. I would

Re: (313) Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread KiDD*e
@hyperreal.org Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 5:50 PM Subject: (313) Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: (313) retroactive 002 They may have long ago, but not since they launched the new site. Most samples are 60 seconds-ish now, although some older ones are shorter, and occasionally some are longer. Thing is, I can't

Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread Matt Kane's Brain
They can mix in street noise, conversations, and other tracks in the background to mimic shopping at a brick and mortar store. On Mar 29, 2006, at 10:51, robin wrote: They may have long ago, but not since they launched the new site. Most samples are 60 seconds-ish now, although some older

Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread Michael . Elliot-Knight
313@hyperreal.org Subject Re: (313) retroactive 002

Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread Edward George
Thing is, I can't think of many other sites that actually stick to a 30 second limit, otherwise I would just assume Juno don't care. I might have it wrong then. I hope so, I don't like short clips either. last.fm have in their FAQ that their licenses only allow them to play 30 seconds

Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread Matt Kane's Brain
Subject Re: (313) retroactive 002 They can mix in street noise, conversations, and other tracks in the background to mimic shopping at a brick and mortar store. On Mar 29, 2006, at 10:51, robin

Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread Sakari Karipuro
robin wrote on Wed, 29 Mar 2006 about following: Juno stick to the 30 second thing too. Some sites don't though as you say. hmm, they do? usually they have something like 1m30s to 3m.. never seen less than 1m sample on their site!? ..unless they've switched last week sakke

Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread robin
Juno stick to the 30 second thing too. Some sites don't though as you say. hmm, they do? usually they have something like 1m30s to 3m.. never seen less than 1m sample on their site!? ..unless they've switched last week i'm just showing that i haven't shopped there for over 18 months i

Re: (313) Re: SPAM-LOW: Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-29 Thread Jason Brunton
: - Original Message - From: robin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Paul Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 313@Hyperreal.Org 313@hyperreal.org Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 3:23 PM Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: (313) retroactive 002 it's a RIAA/BPI thing, any longer and technically they're in breach

Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-28 Thread robin
hey JT, i don't understand the lofi clip thing either. This appears to be 002 but is different to what boomkat describe http://www.retroactiverecords.us/Someday.htm Bit smooth for me. robin... digging the clips of the new retroactive 12, another garage-y one by livin in

Re: (313) retroactive 002

2006-03-28 Thread J.T.
hey robin! the retroactive website looks a little out of date. they must have changed retro-002 to the one piccadilly and boomkat now have...the 002 on the retroactive website is nothing special for me either. and the vox are bit cheesey i guess, but i like em somehow. especially the