Sunday, September 6, 2009

Fools Extra - Pretend To Be Normal (tape, Fools Extra fxk 006, 198?)

LinkVery low on the information side. The cover just says 'Pretend To be Normal' and the catalogue number. De Nederlandse Cassette Catalogus lists Fools Extra as the band. I think this was a collective of bands/musicians from Zeeuws-Vlaanderen, in the south -west part of The Netherlands. Punk like, but then much more improvised on this tape. Soon, I'll have another tape which is more punk like.



Psyence Guy said...

Wonderful basement disco! Like the voices in my head formed their own band. TY

Over The Moon said...

Fools Extra is great but ripping it at 320 bit rate is insane, given how lo-fi the recording is. Results in large waste of hard-drive space. I'm normally adamantly against lossy-2-lossy conversion, but in this case, may transcode it down to 128 bit rate. Great upload, though. Thanks much.

433 RPM said...

recently somebody delivered a comment on a 2007 post: "dude, why 128 bit. this is 2009". you ask me to to the reverse, for reasons I really fail to see. on the risk of sounding anal: but why do i bother about all of this, if I can't seem to get it right?


Over The Moon said...

Sorry if you took offense to my comment. No offense intended. Just that a lo-fi recording ripped at a very-high (in fact, the very highest) bit-rate (320 CBR) can be perceived by some folks as overkill on the hard drive.

The best analogy I can offer would be if you had some of Thomas Edison's (or even Charles Ives or Rachmaninoff) original recordings from 75-200 years ago and then they were released as 320 MP3.

The sound quality of Thomas Edison's recordings would be so poor that they might as well just be released as 128 bit rate, as no high(er) fidelity can really be attained, given the limitations of the original recording.

Hope that makes sense. Love all you do here, so please don't stop the wonderful posts, just wanted to get in two cents about bit rate / fidelity as it relates to hard drive consumption.