Original sourced from YouTube. Many thanks to the original recorder and uploader.

Converted directly from 720p HD video to Flac. (Lossy original source).

Satisfaction patched from other video.







Part 1 - [www.filefactory.com]
Part 2 - [www.filefactory.com]

Fixed Sympathy for the Devil - [www.filefactory.com]

I'm afraid I couldn't correct the shocking bum notes at the beginning of Gimme Shelter



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2013-05-15 10:25 by strettonbull.

Hi Chris, thanks for this, is it the same source as Kream's do you know?

Yes the original source is the same.

thank you strettonbull
great work ...again ! ! !
friendly from paris
J.M

Thanks for working on this souce and for sharing it!

Thanks for all your work

Hi Stretton

Thanks for your work.
I have noticed that a few seconds are missin' in the intro of SFTD for some reasons,
no big deal and I've mixed the thing with another YT video.Maybe you should try yourself to do somethin' better like me, anyway it's here

SFTD mixed
WT
until may 28

HMN

Weer bedankt Chris!

Thanks Honestman - I've fixed my version and added it to the first post.

Thanks for the fixes gentlemen!

Thank you very much!!!

Great Work.



><

Quote
strettonbull

Converted directly from 720p HD video to Flac.

Again many thanks for your work!

But original audio file has only 192 kb/s, so it's lossy and it will be lossy even if you convert it to flac.

Quote
werther2003

Quote
strettonbull

Converted directly from 720p HD video to Flac.

Again many thanks for your work!

But original audio file has only 192 kb/s, so it's lossy and it will be lossy even if you convert it to flac.

No lossy flacs, that's really bad form. It's like peeing in the trading pool.

gracias-gracias-gracias

Quote
werther2003

Quote
strettonbull

Converted directly from 720p HD video to Flac.

Again many thanks for your work!

But original audio file has only 192 kb/s, so it's lossy and it will be lossy even if you convert it to flac.

Yes - that's what I already said here - [www.iorr.org]

I've added a note to the post above too, to make it clear.

Quote
werther2003

Quote
strettonbull

Converted directly from 720p HD video to Flac.

Again many thanks for your work!

But original audio file has only 192 kb/s, so it's lossy and it will be lossy even if you convert it to flac.

The point of converting to flac is not to try to improve the quality (we do know that's not possible), but to stop the quality from being degraded even further.

Quote
JimmyShelter
but to stop the quality from being degraded even further.

it's very hard to further degrade of quality this kind of audio files so there is no even 1 reason to keep this file as huge "lossless" files. no everyone uderstand this problem and no everyone can check quality of these files.
sharing this recording as lossless files it is very bad idea

I know of only one freeware programme that will edit mp3s WITHOUT re-encoding, & that one's quite basic (mp3DirectCut). All others will re-encode in the editing process.

Say I start out with an mp3 encoded at 192 bits, I then edit it & then save as high as 320bits, I'm not upgrading, I'm making an mp3 of an mp3, hence I'm losing quality. Re-encode an mp3 4-5 times & it sounds awful, I tried it out ages ago as an experiment

To get around this you first convert the mp3 into a wav file & you can then do anything to that wav & it will not lose quality as long as it stays a wav or as some compressed lossless form like flac (Anyone remember SHN, they were the go in the early days of lossless audio)

Quote
kream

Quote
JimmyShelter
but to stop the quality from being degraded even further.

it's very hard to further degrade of quality this kind of audio files so there is no even 1 reason to keep this file as huge "lossless" files. no everyone uderstand this problem and no everyone can check quality of these files.
sharing this recording as lossless files it is very bad idea

Agreed!!!. Once someone pees in the pool, no reason to drink the pool water whether or not someone else is peeing in the pool. Once something is lossy I think it is a bad idea to do anything to confuse people.

Can anybody point me at the clip used to patch the beginning of SFTD? Please?

Quote
JimmyShelter
Can anybody point me at the clip used to patch the beginning of SFTD? Please?

It's this one I've used





HMN

Thank you very much. Brilliant. I never found that one

Quote
kream

Quote
JimmyShelter
but to stop the quality from being degraded even further.

it's very hard to further degrade of quality this kind of audio files so there is no even 1 reason to keep this file as huge "lossless" files. no everyone uderstand this problem and no everyone can check quality of these files.
sharing this recording as lossless files it is very bad idea

I disagree. It is a very smart idea not to degrade the quality of the best available source.

www.rsundercover.eu

Quote
JimmyShelter

Quote
werther2003

Quote
strettonbull

Converted directly from 720p HD video to Flac.

Again many thanks for your work!

But original audio file has only 192 kb/s, so it's lossy and it will be lossy even if you convert it to flac.

The point of converting to flac is not to try to improve the quality (we do know that's not possible), but to stop the quality from being degraded even further.

Actually it would be further degraded for someone encoding that "Lossy FLAC" to mp3 for use on a portable player, whereas it would not be degraded further if they used the straight rip available here : [www.iorr.org]

So this Flac is :
- confusing as FLAC is assumed to be lossless, not lossy
- waste of time (downloading from FileFactory if you're not a paid up member)
- further degradation if used on a portable device (reencoding of an mp3)
- as usual no info given on the "remastering" process or on what it adds other than "STRETTONBULL REMASTER" to the title

-> AVOID and get the straight mp3 rip available here : [www.iorr.org]



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2013-05-16 11:32 by gotdablouse.

Quote
gotdablouse

Quote
JimmyShelter

Quote
werther2003

Quote
strettonbull

Converted directly from 720p HD video to Flac.

Again many thanks for your work!

But original audio file has only 192 kb/s, so it's lossy and it will be lossy even if you convert it to flac.

The point of converting to flac is not to try to improve the quality (we do know that's not possible), but to stop the quality from being degraded even further.

Actually it would be further degraded for someone encoding that "Lossy FLAC" to mp3 for use on a portable player, whereas it would not be degraded further if they used the straight rip available here : [www.iorr.org]

Not strictly true, once opened in an editor for splitting etc. it has then been re-encoded to mp3, the version that has been encoded to flac hasn't.
So re-encoding the flac to mp3 wouldn't be any different, they've both been re-encoded once.

There is a freeware tool to cut mp3s WITHOUT reencoding, see vox12string's above, tested and approved.

Quote
gotdablouse
There is a freeware tool to cut mp3s WITHOUT reencoding, see vox12string's above, tested and approved.

That maybe so, but the 'straight rip' you referred to wasn't a straight rip.

Quote
kream
.. audio from video was extracted as WAV file, and because everything over 16 kHz was cut off i converted it to mp3 and bitrate 192 kbps ..

And while we are quoting vox12string, why not quote the rest of it

Quote
vox12string
Say I start out with an mp3 encoded at 192 bits, I then edit it & then save as high as 320bits, I'm not upgrading, I'm making an mp3 of an mp3, hence I'm losing quality. Re-encode an mp3 4-5 times & it sounds awful, I tried it out ages ago as an experiment

To get around this you first convert the mp3 into a wav file & you can then do anything to that wav & it will not lose quality as long as it stays a wav or as some compressed lossless form like flac (Anyone remember SHN, they were the go in the early days of lossless audio)

The original point remains, someone downloading that "remastered" FLAC for listening on their portable device (and who doesn't these days), on top of wasting their time downloading large lossy files on FileFactory, is going to end up with worse quality than if he'd downloaded the original MP3 version and played that on his portable device.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-05-17 11:22 by gotdablouse.

If he'd downloaded the video and then taken the audio stream directly from it with no further encoding, then yes.
But my original point still remains, that kream's mp3 had already been re-encoded and wasn't a direct stream copy of the original.

Quote
gotdablouse
The original point remains, someone downloading that "remastered" FLAC for listening on their portable device (and who doesn't these days), on top of wasting their time downloading large lossy files on FileFactory, is going to end up with worse quality than if he'd downloaded the original MP3 version and played that on his portable device.

Except if you have a portable device that can play FLAC files ...