mvctoys Wrote:I suppose ev

#169488
AvatarAnonymous
Inactive

mvctoys Wrote:

I suppose everyone has their own creative opinion’s on what’s good, and what isn’t. That’s why we are all different! The services you mentioned fall into the sub-standard catagory, IMHO. It just isn’t the same as the original recording. I listened to the Top 10 songs on Acid Planet, and they are more like cheap karaoke versions. I am quite confident that my clients would find them to be inferrior to the original recordings they are familiar with. Of course, that reflects on me and my business. I’ll stick with the originals.

Interesting!

As like you and a lot of other people posting here, I respect personal opinions too. Although… I have to agree with "birdcat". There are a lot of sources out there that offer royalty free music that have a very high quality sound. I personally use Smartsound and I find it very well done. It comes in 44K stereo CD quality giving you a wide dynamic range, it sounds GREAT over my 6.1 surround sound system and they have a huge selection that you can customize the length to fit the requirement you need.

I guess my question to you is, What is your interpretation of good sound versus sub-standard sound?

Just because royalty free music isn’t on the "Top 10 Billboard Chart doesn’t make it sub-standard. It does make it legal though. πŸ˜‰ OK I admit that I’m not always a law bidding citizen either because sometimes the clients ask for copyrighted songs to be used so I just do it. (That’s a whole other string that was beat to death on this forum.)

IMO however, video works (especially weddings) can seem like a clich when you use existing copyrighted music. When you look around on other wedding videographers sites, you can run across the same song being used 4 or 5 times.

RAM

Best Products

homicide-bootstrap