Hey do you guys remember when the whole Velvet Underground catalogue was edited down in bitrate a few years ago, to try to make the Beatles look better in comparison? We're talking about a band that recorded with many different labels and had its quality practically guaranteed by each corroborating each other, it's a massive technical undertaking, and all only done to laugh at you for listening to a band where Paul actually died in a car accident in the 70s. If the more commercially successful band can go back and make your music worse to make theirs sound better, where is the incentive to break new ground?
>>131907326>the whole Velvet Underground catalogue was edited down in bitrate a few years agoWhat is that supposed to mean, that they transcoded it to v0 on spotify or something? Anyone with a CD can restore the lossless bitrate. You're probably talking about dynamic range and just fucking up
>>131907326>to try to make the Beatles look better in comparison? you're so full of shit lolthe Beatles surely needed the valuable boost only VU could provide lmfao
what OP is trying to tell you is that the VU remasters were shit and his paranoia thinks it was a deliberate attack from Paul McCartney. meds time
>>131907326thats because you're listening to low bitrate youtube playback
