Today is the first time I saw this page.
Granted, I wasn't really paying attention to bitrates at the time. in the future we will offer wav files.
Calling the free downoad sarcasm, ( I suspect you meant to say cynical), and implying I was making a hollow gesture is far beyond lame.
With guys like you up his ass, no wonder Trent is taking a break.
Boris / Noise Within
@ Pk_Henry: Money has nothing to do with it. If you're releasing something as a free download, it doesn't cost any more to release a higher quality file. Such is the magic of bittorrent. @ Zach216: See what I said above. And I can tell the difference (the technical term is "ABX") a 192kbps and 256kbps stream, so yes bitrate does matter to me. Also, a poor quality free release just makes me think you're a poor quality artist who really has no idea what you're doing. I paid for NIN's Ghosts release BECAUSE of the high quality free release, not in spite of it.
Lanjackal ---> a simple difference: NIN are rich (they can do whatever they want now). Noise Within dont. And honestly you have free download and still you say shit about it? just because it hasnt the bigger quality? Ten years ago you wouldnt have that comment.
I've seen a few bands do this. That's part of what gives you incentive to buy it, higher quality on the CD. Most people can't even tell the difference... Like does it matter to you when your Fiddy Cent is in WAV or 128k mp3? Doubtful. Anyways... here's the link to the album: http://freedownload.noisewithin.com/
Real geniuses, these guys *sarcasm*. "Let's release a free album with shitty quality 128kbps and 160kbps tracks!" Thanks for the gesture, but at that bitrate it's pretty worthless. See NIN for how to pull off a QUALITY free music release.