I don't see why "the lossless tape/WAV files" are "out there". Maybe they are "in there" ; in the vaults.'

If this bootleg has been tapped from the RS computer vaults, which I believe they have, the bootlegers might only have had access to the MP3 version. Which has happened many times before. For instance the unreleased "Toy" album of David Bowie from 2001 that the bootlegers got a hold of. Only MP3 version exist. The lossless files are still in Bowie's vault.

This Japanese bootleg label here is not necessarily holding on to a lossless version

Imho the people behind this one noticed the two major releases of new Stones stuff were lossy (the ABKCO leaks and the Art Collins tapes) so maybe they thought : "the market is ready. Lossy stuff is no longer a no-no and the quality of the material we have will overcome reserves about the lack of high-end on the files".

Thank you! Amazing tracks on here.

Quote
vancouver
thank you anyway i put the files in cronological order

don't lie to me is from 86 ? not 72 ?

sad that tell her how(potted shrimp) it is was not on sticky fingers deluxe

Care to share?

Quote
dcba
Imho the people behind this one noticed the two major releases of new Stones stuff were lossy (the ABKCO leaks and the Art Collins tapes) so maybe they thought : "the market is ready. Lossy stuff is no longer a no-no and the quality of the material we have will overcome reserves about the lack of high-end on the files".

OK, the quality ranking goes like this:

1 = best to 6 = worst

1. Lossless files from excellent quality source tapes
2. Lossy files from excellent quality source tapes
3. Lossless files from medium quality source tapes
4. Lossy files from medium quality source tapes
5. Lossless files from poor quality source tapes
6. Lossy files from poor quality source tapes

I'd prefer option 1 because this is naturally the best. But if option 1 is not available, I gladly take option 2 because this is still better than options 3 to 6.

And this is obviously a case of option 2 here.

If anybody prefers option 3 or even 5 - well, this is a free world. At least still it is, so make your choice while you can!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-07 18:11 by retired_dog.

Good summary, it's always good to lay out the facts when in doubt ;-)

I guess some of us take exception with the "whining" about the "alleged" "128/160 kbps quality" of the source files because frankly how many Q/1 studio boots have we had over the years ? None comes to mind other than the Voodoo Brew/Residue/Stew series (haven't put them through a "lossless checker" but since they came out in 1995/1998 they can't be MP3s, they could still be DAT to Cassette transfers though and we know that chops off the high-end too), nothing comes to mind. The 2002 sessions sound great too, but what "path" did they follow ? No one here knows.

Quote
jbwelda
The properties of the files I have downloaded from that source say 162kbps, so in my case anyhow, its "actually" indeed. Haven't checked them all, but the ones I have have been.

Not complaining, mind you. But if these were initially ripped from the cd from wav format, and were not ripped at least at 320, which compared to flac is still lossy, they could be at better resolution than they are, no matter what is actually on the cd. Just sayin.

Thank you again whoever did these, and anyone with insight into holes in my logic, please, come forward.


jb

Holes indeed or rather some confusion as to what is being discussed ;-) I checked and the MP3s initially posted by bkeys are indeed VBR files at an average bitrate of 162 kbps (VBR so much better than CBR 160 files), but that does not have any bearing on the original LOSSLESS files being "actually" sourced from 128/160 kbps MP3s as some are stating.

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-07 17:24 by gotdablouse.

Quote
retired_dog

5. Lossless files from poor quality source tapes

I remember option 5 for some UC outtakes released by VGP (on #240?) : lossless version of obviously generated/hissy tapes and (to me) rather tepid/boring music.
What we got much later on (with the Art Collins files or this brand new set) though lossy, is far more interesting.

A low bit resolution file converted to wav format and then burned to cd is STILL better resolution than taking that wav file and converting it BACK to 162 resolution mp3. That second conversion further degrades even the original low res sound quality. In other words, even though the original file and the conversion file from wav back to low res mp3 are of the same bit rate, they are not equivalent in sound quality because further degradation took place during the second conversion to mp3.

I know that for a fact. It is obvious on its face. So I am confused about all this confusion here. If they had been converted to 320kbps from the wav file they would theoretically sound better than being converted to the lower bit rate file. Not as good as the original low res mp3 mind you but better than if it were reconverted back to low res from the wav file.

The key word here is "loss". Once something is lost in conversion, reconverting it back to its original format does not "find" what was lost.

However, I still think these sound pretty good so I doubt all this lossy conversion is going on somehow.

I am well aware that bootleggers work with what they got rather than what we wish they had.

jb



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-07 19:55 by jbwelda.

Right, the "issue" that some here are having is that the Silver CDs (and therefore the theoretically lossless FLACs) were sourced from MP3s, "allegedly" of the "128/160kbps variety", NOT that the original lossy share was done as VBR 162kbps MP3s, the bitrate that you used to confirm their "actually" of the "128/160kbps variety".

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-08 01:47 by gotdablouse.

sorry don't know how to put up the text from cronolocial order

Quote
vancouver
sorry don't know how to put up the text from cronolocial order

1 select the text
2 copy
3 paste it here (as a comment)

I am having trouble downloading any tips

Quote
vancouver
sorry don't know how to put up the text from cronolocial order

You might want to look here first and post your list there since someone is compiling the dates based on suggestions/sites : [iorr.org]

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio

As said before, What a great find! Thank you to all who are involved. Now its time to guess the dates & credits. Cheers All!

Brian had some kind of genius for finding people, didn't he?
-"He did. He got us together – Charlie, Mick and me."-"Life" by Keith Richards


Roll Tide

How on God’s earth do I use collect?
These sites are so damn difficult

I went here- and just clicked download on my Mac

[wetransfer.com]

Then I double clicked the download at the bottom of Chrome and a window opened and I double clicked on the file and all the songs came up -they also went automatically into my iMusic and I cant wait to listen to them as the little snippets I heard sounded great!

Thanks!

CHELSKEITH

awesome! Thanks so much for the link!!

Quote
Erik_Snow
the bootlegers might only have had access to the MP3 version. Which has happened many times before. For instance the unreleased "Toy" album of David Bowie from 2001 that the bootlegers got a hold of. Only MP3 version exist. The lossless files are still in Bowie's vault.

you got a point there. i have several versions of TOY , all MP3 based, even though covers claim different. And these days it is very likely that song material is not "copied" on CDs anymore but as digital files

thanks

thank you gotdablouse

jb

All I get is a promotion to buy WINZIP 25, I see the file but click download and it wants me to buy WINZIP25

Does anyone know who the second guitarist on "Built that Way" could be? Might be a number of people who were at the BLACK AND BLUE sessions.

no



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-12 19:51 by wiredallnight.

Quote
gotdablouse

Quote
kowalski

Quote
gotdablouse
"actually" ?

Actually like in for real.

Again, not saying they're not worth listening. Just pointing the lossy source.

Again, if you have any specific/typical "128kbps MP3 artifacts" too point out, feel free. In the meantime it's not "actually", it's "allegedly".

Definitely actually

And yes, these tracks sound like low/average bitrate mp3's. That's how I noticed in the first place their likely mp3 source. By actually listening to them. Running them through an audio editor only confirmed my suspicions.

Where can i download this stuff?

The original link doesn´t work anymore.

Thanks

Quote
knatalio
Where can i download this stuff?

The original link doesn´t work anymore.

Thanks

Thanks to werther
[electricladyland.synology.me]

Neither link working for me, anywhere to get this currently?

I think I managed to get the flat files. Now they won’t burn to disc. I really hate technology. Why won’t they just release it & let me buy it at a reasonable price ffs

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
knatalio
Where can i download this stuff?

The original link doesn´t work anymore.

Thanks

Thanks to werther
[electricladyland.synology.me]

"You're not authorized to view the torrents. Sorry!"

Link has expired...

Any chance someone could be kind enough to post it again?