Wonderful. Thank you.

can you please send it to me, too

aggelosch@the.forthnet.gr

Thanks!!

Quote
gimme_shelter

Quote
midnrambler

Quote
NathanLaze
thank you very much.... one question though, why making wav files if the original ones are lossy? up-converting to a larger file adds some unpleasant sonic artifacts etc. downloading from y/t and leaving 'em in their own pristine 128 kbps should do alright, i think... in case you didn't dub 'em onto tape and then transfer to your cd-r

You are wrong. Making a wav file from a lossy file like youTube's mp4 does not add anything "unpleasant" to the file or the music. You have just the decoded mp4 file with the artifacts that were already there, but there is nothing added. So a wav file made from a lossy file is OK.

It is ok for personal use, but once you start sharing it is useful to mention the (unnecessary) step of conversion. That way everybody knows the lineage, which in this case is clear.

Actually, everyone here is right:

It is true that converting a lossy file to a WAV file OF THE SAME SAMPLING RATE does not alter the source. Nor would making a FLAC file from that WAV file alter anything either. Its just like putting a small box in a bigger box - no corners are cut, only some space is wasted.

However, the original 128kHz lossy source was sampled at 48kHz and to put its 48kHz WAV file on CD you have to down-convert it to 44.1kHz, which alters the original, however slighlty. This is how CDs are made - official, bootlegs, private - so while there is no better way to put this source material on audio CD, it is technically altered.

Finally, the issue of lineage is important, and quoting the source on the artwork or in the info doc might be a solution.

Another solution might be a 2-session CD ("Enhanced CD" - remember those?), which adds the original files in the Data track...

Repost active link please?

can you please send it
thanks

Dear RankStranger, could you also send it to me?

Thanks

pg592003@yahoo.it

Also available here [iorr.org]