For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
andrews27
Let me tell you one experience with .mp3 vs flac. There was a Bob Dylan show a couple years ago that got many good mentions on the internet. The only copy available for download was in .mp3. I waited a week for a flac to emerge (as happens), but none did, so I DL'd the .mp3 and burned it to CD-R. It was a good show, well recorded, but thin sounding with distorted highs as you get from .mp3. An AM radio sound.
About six weeks later, a flac version became available online - it was the same taper and recording, down to track times and start points for tracks. While I was downloading and burning it, I played the first disc of the .mp3 set. As I had heard before, the pre-show applause sounded like an irritating digital hash, not a sea of individual handclaps. Two guys were talking near the taper's mic, but their words were inaudible. When the first flac-to-.wav disc finished burning (I burn at slow speed), I took the old one out and put the new one in the player. The applause sounded natural and lifelike. I could hear every word of what the two guys in the audience said.
Quote
rskinno
Answer by me:
I am a bit saues on the coments of the last week:
Loss or not. I think it comes on the good sound
it's my opinion. When others think differently
they should not take my things for themselves, one asks already here
free and some do not. Shall they do it then
from ? To buy. Whether it is then loss-free is a question. I do not care
(mp3 ..) only the sound must please me.
I have Munich 2017 complete but loss-bearing!
It is not a source, just a collection of private individuals
Tapes and YouTope.
Quote
andrews27
Let me tell you one experience with .mp3 vs flac. There was a Bob Dylan show a couple years ago that got many good mentions on the internet. The only copy available for download was in .mp3. I waited a week for a flac to emerge (as happens), but none did, so I DL'd the .mp3 and burned it to CD-R. It was a good show, well recorded, but thin sounding with distorted highs as you get from .mp3. An AM radio sound.
About six weeks later, a flac version became available online - it was the same taper and recording, down to track times and start points for tracks. While I was downloading and burning it, I played the first disc of the .mp3 set. As I had heard before, the pre-show applause sounded like an irritating digital hash, not a sea of individual handclaps. Two guys were talking near the taper's mic, but their words were inaudible. When the first flac-to-.wav disc finished burning (I burn at slow speed), I took the old one out and put the new one in the player. The applause sounded natural and lifelike. I could hear every word of what the two guys in the audience said. The music and singing sounded incomparably richer.
I download very few things in .mp3, and burn even less. When I can replace them with flac files, I like to give the .mp3 discs away to people who tell me that they can't hear the difference. A little mean-spirited, I know.
I have downloaded .mp3 music files that are so lossy, they can't be converted to .wav, which means I have to listen to them off my computer hard drive, or make a digital file CD-R that I can only hear in my car CD player (my home player won't play .mp3s on CD-R). .mp3s are for people who want portable listening only - and when I'm on the go, I mostly don't have time to listen to my own music, except in the car.
Even the guy who invented .mp3 says in interviews that he regrets it. Why do you think they call it "lossy"? If even audience noise is more accurate sounding in lossless, then...
In 2015, we got some valuable US Stones show captures on cell phones and other lossy-medium devices, and I'm grateful to have the remastered versions of those - including rskinno's. I'm sure that among 20 HDs of recorded shows, there are some lossy versions converted to flac files that I don't know about (and some that I do know about), since I'm not techy enough to do frequency spectrum analysis.
If a lossy capture is all that's available, or is a better sonic recording than a lossless capture, then I can live with that and be glad for it. But I didn't get into music listening or audio gear, or show collecting on the internet, to be listening to everything (especially studio track boots) at a loss of recorded material.
Thanks again to all those who have put in the time, skill, and taste to remaster lossy show captures into something we can live with and enjoy.
P.S. rskinno - your Hamburg 2017 Stones show is a great piece of work, whatever the medium. As was your Pittsburgh 2015 (I was there, and got searched for recording devices).
Quote
vox12string
Keep posting rskinno, your material is highly regarded by most of us here.
I think what is important is labeling the source of any material so that folks don't download duplicates by mistake. I've done this several times & this wastes my bandwidth which I have to be careful of (I live Down Under)