Letterbomb

Of course. But the point I was making is, the individual was saying that people that don't like the album, are people that can't accept a major band radically changing their sound. And I disagree with this. I don't think the sound of Mylo is all that radically different from what we have heard before. If you compare say, X&Y to Viva La Vida, then that was a time where you could really point and say, wow the Band really moved in a new direction musically. Their songwriting changed for this album, and I could see people feeling torn. With Mylo, I feel like the songs are pretty much standard affair for Coldplay. Very simplistic. And the Electronic elements really don't add much to the music. Whereas I felt on Viva, the new sounds they went for, actually had depth and expanded on their songwriting. Here, they feel more like decorations, that are just dressing up what is a pretty standard Coldplay album in terms of the song structures.

See this is where I disagree. I don't really find Mylo to be all that different or radical, musically. At all the songs core, these are pretty simplistic tracks (in terms of the writing). The electronic elements are nice, but don't really do much other then to dress up the songs.

Kind of surprised so many like X&Y. I always thought that was their worst album. As someone that thought Viva was their second best album (behind AROBTTH), it's blowing my mind how many people don't like Viva, and thought X&Y was incredible. Probably explains why I'm not on the same page with folks that really love Mylo. I think it's a regression for the band.

There really isn't. I honestly think it's more of a mental thing. People see 320 and assume, well it's 320, the biggest number. It's also the highest you can go in MP3 bit rate, so it must be the best. Let me try to explain it this way to you: MP3 in itself is a compression. The difference between a 256 VBR and 320 CBR (VBR vs CBR) is too little at that compression level for the ear to hear. Now, if you are talking FLAC/Lossless vs MP3, then yes, there is a difference in quality. If you are talking 128 vs 192, then yes you wil hear the difference. If you are talking 192 to 320, then yes again, you will hear the difference. But V0 to 320, you will not. Because they are basically same thing, one is just more efficient. But before I get into that, let me explain what VBR is vs CBR. 320 is CBR (Constant Bit Rate). It rips every song across the board at the same bit rate, even though not every song needs 320. VBR (various bit rate), detects what each song needs, and rips it accordingly. The best way to explain this, is imagine you are a painter that has to paint within the lines. Every song has a different outline, but all connect to make one picture. A 256 V0 actually paints perfectly within the lines, and fills up as much as is needed to complete the painting. It adjusts itself to each outline, as every song is different and needs different amounts of paint to fill in the outlines. A 320 (CBR) just says screw it, and splashes paint all across the white board, because it wants to be 100% sure all of it is covered. Don't get me wrong, 320 is great quality. It's guaranteed great quality. It's the same quality as V0 tbh lol But at the end of the day V0 is a superior format, and why so many audiophile and private tracking sites prefer it. Why scene groups use it now as the standard. It has the same quality as 320, but it saves space. Just my 2 cents. I know not everyone agrees, some still prefer 320 over 256 vbr (or a V0 rip). And there is nothing wrong with that. Like I said, 320 is guaranteed top quality. But real top quality is Lossless. And when you get to those lower levels of compression (such as MP3) you won't be able to tell the difference between a 256 vbr and a 320 CBR. The thing to realize is, while 320 is a higher bit rate, at the level of compression mp3 is, the 256-320 hearing level is too similar. Hope that helps! Either way, whatever format you use, it will be great quality.

Yeah. But you need to adjust your setting in iTunes. If you rip it at 256 AAC or MP3 or 320 AAC or MP3, then your rip will be the same as the one sold on iTunes. I'm not sure what iTunes defaults at. But I would reckon you need to adjust your rip settings first. Here is a screenshot of where you do that: First go to preferences: Then go to "Import Settings" Then go to "Import Using" and set it to what you would like. MP3, AAC, etc. But for "setting" go to CUSTOM, which will have a drop down window. You can then set what bit rate you want it to rip at: And of course, you don't have to follow the exact settings I have there. Just giving an example. You can adjust to how you like. I will say though, honestly...the leak will be the same quality as the iTunes rip. The leak was ripped from a retail CD at 256 VBR (it was a V0 rip).

Most don't listen to their music in Lossless. You are correct that the highest you can go is Lossless. But the individual was asking in terms of the mp3/aac format. 320 is technically the best you can get for MP3. But V0/VBR rips are superior to 320. Because 320 assumes all the tracks need to be ripped at 320. V0 takes as much as is needed per song, and adjusts. So you pretty much get the same quality, but it uses the space more efficiently. MP3 in itself is compression. So when you get to the 256 VBR and 320 levels, you can't tell the difference between the two. But when you are talking about 256 to LOSSLESS, then yeah, you will hear the difference then.

It actually leaked from a Scene group. First showed up on a private torrent site. This individual got their hand on the retail copy, and per the Scene rules, ripped it at V0. So the leak came from the retail CD.

Production (it's pretty compressed and over done). The pacing of the album feels a bit off. The placement of the acoustic tracks seem a bit jarring in comparison to the rest of the albums musical style. Martin's vocal parts are rather weak on a handful of songs etc. etc.

Depends on how you rip it. You need to adjust your settings. If you don't understand any of that, then it's probably safe to say the iTunes version will be better quality. Most iTune songs are in: 256 kbps AAC 256 obviously will trump a 128-192 rip But if you rip your CD at 320 or VBR (256) then iTunes won't be better. The version that leaked for instance, will be the same quality as the iTunes one that goes on sale. Both are a VBR rip.

I'm not going to vote...just yet. Because I think First Impressions are always inaccurate. Either you are too excited for something, and as time wears off you realize it's not as good. Or conversely, you are let down at first, because you had too high of expectations. But I have to say, I find MX to be really disappointing on my first two listens. I just don't like the pacing of the songs (the random acoustic tracks that don't really add to the album, and clash with the overall musical style). The production is overdone and compressed. And well, I just don't find most of the songs to be all that impressive from a writing point of view. I really hate being negative. I'm one of those people that loved Viva La Vida, and have praised the band for continuing to grow and evolve. But this feels like a misstep. Then again, I need to listen more. So that's why I'm holding off on scoring.

For those not familiar with audio quality, this leaked in V0 (Scene rip of the retail CD). You really won't get a better quality unless you listen to this in FLAC/Lossless. So for most, this will be the best quality you will get in the mp3 format. (And no, there isn't a big enough difference between V0 and 320. People think there is, but there isn't. V0 is the same as 320, just more efficient)