Elixir Sue Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 i mean no harm by my comments to those who indulge in the live show taping experience. that's their deal and there's nothing wrong with that. what i can't understand is why they care so much about what format it's in and why they care about an "inferior" version for those who can take it or leave it. why would somebody give a shit? i just don't get it. there's an open hostility there that needs a serious ass whoopin' to put things back in perspective. it's just music...it's entertainment...or art...or all 3. to each his/her own.I'm not a serious trader or anything, but the way I understand it is that people WHO do trade a lot don't want the "trading pool" to get polluted with lower-quality copies...which will inevitably happen if people download mp3 versions, then trade to others, who will then trade to others, etc. They don't give a shit what you're listening to at home; they just know that the low-quality version will multiply. Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I'm not a serious trader or anything, but the way I understand it is that people WHO do trade a lot don't want the "trading pool" to get polluted with lower-quality copies...which will inevitably happen if people download mp3 versions, then trade to others, who will then trade to others, etc. They don't give a shit what you're listening to at home; they just know that the low-quality version will multiply.and again, i don't know why that matters to them. i don't participate in the "trading pool". any versions that i would get as an mp3 would have been freely offered as such and any person who values the quality of the format that much would steer clear of an mp3 anyway. Link to post Share on other sites
ction Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 So, catching an mp3 from the trading pool is a lot like catching herpes from the dating pool? Link to post Share on other sites
Elixir Sue Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 and again, i don't know why that matters to them. i don't participate in the "trading pool". any versions that i would get as an mp3 would have been freely offered as such and any person who values the quality of the format that much would steer clear of an mp3 anyway.Again, your personal use doesn't matter to them...but just because YOU'RE not downloading them and trading them doesn't mean there aren't many other people who ARE. That's where the "trading pool" comes in. I'm not even a trader, so I really don't give a shit about this...I'm just saying that I can see where they're coming from. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Here is a common statement one can find on a lot of BT sites - Do not convert to MP3 or other lossy formats and distributeDo not profit from this recording in any way - if these things did not matter, then you would not see things like this. Also - you will notice that Mp3 rips are not to be uploaded - only FLACS or SHNS, etc. on live/studio boot BT sites. All torrents must be of music-related content. - No audio torrent may distribute any lossily compressed music [e.g. MP3, VQF, OGG, or audio extracted from video DVDs that are not explicitly known to have uncompressed LPCM audio] so long as the material has been or is expected to be available to the trading community in better quality. In the rare cases where we allow audio material from lossy files, it must be in the original lossy codec and filetype: conversions to a filetype for lossless audio are always prohibited. See Moderator Override for how to submit a torrent with permitted lossily compressed music, and DIME's FAQ for special rules regarding webcasts and digital satellite broadcasts and MiniDisc recordings. Now why do you think that is? Link to post Share on other sites
uncle wilco Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 Now why do you think that is?considering this has nothing to do with me...can i go now? how did i ever get into this conversation? and no, don't remind me. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 N.B. not N.I.B. My thinking was a bit fouled as to it being ok to put up studio boot tracks in Mp3 - As I said, some people straightened me out on that. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Here I heroically jump into this way late in the game but...... for you audiophile FLAC nazi's can't you usually find an unpolluted non-mp3 version anyways? So if someone 'pollutes' the trading pool with mp3's dont take them. They're easy to use and share and I am really sorry, tapers I love what you do, but a couple of fancy condensor microphones in the crowd doesn't really physically put me there. I've heard some pretty okay taper recordings, but they don't lose a whole lot of charm in the mp3 format, we're not dealing with Sear Sound recordings here. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I disagree - and if you do some research, you may change your mind. Again, if it did not matter, then all the BT sites that cater to taper friendly bands would be full of Mp3 torrents. Link to post Share on other sites
j4lackey Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Hey .... What's up, y'all? Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 As the editor of a newspaper, I put a lot of care and worry into how the newspaper looks and reads. I work hard to make it the best newspaper it can be.But once I'm done with it and it hits the streets, I have no control over what happens to it. I would hope my readers cherish every issue, binding them together in books so their journalistic brilliance can be savored for years to come. But they mostly get thrown in the trash, used to housebreak animals or piled and forgotten until it's time to clean out the garage.The point being I have NO control over what happens to the paper when I am done with it, and I would just be adding unnecessary stress to my life to worry about it. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 I disagree - and if you do some research, you may change your mind. Again, if it did not matter, then all the BT sites that cater to taper friendly bands would be full of Mp3 torrents. Well tapers often put their stuff up in the best format, yes, of course they are trying to preserve their work. They should not be asked to stop, but perhaps our argument finds its synthesis here: Tapers do us all a favor (i mean what a terrible way to half to watch a show, monitoring gear etc.), and the higher quality files do the serious audiophiles a service, maybe these people have folder after folder tracing the many colored sets of the end of the AGIB tour. Why not? But meanwhile, people who convert those things into mp3's and make them available do another type a listener (ones like me) a favor, when I want to know what the heck this new 'Side with the Seeds' song sounds like I click on the kindly posted link and in an instant I can hear the performance. My interaction with the recording starts and ends there. I don't think about what format it is, in fact I think, "Wow I wonder what this will sound like through Jim O' Rourkes ears. I can't wait." I say keep putting FLAC files on BT's, and be glad people post them as mp3's so other people can be part of the action too. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Some more thoughts - For those who want mp3s of (supposed) SOUNDBOARD shows - join one of the illegal BT sites - I see them on there all the time. And people can bitch all they want - not one gives a fuck. You should check out how much effort the people who run bootcity and dime a dozen put into what goes on there - amazing. Converting FLAC: I learned how to do this stuff at the age 39-40-41 - I am sure other folks can handle it. What these tapers are doing, and those who pass on their efforts are doing, is in fact - preserving history. or put it yet another way - Say someone passed on a novel to you that you really wanted to read - Would you want to read the novel as published, or a reader's digest condensed version? Again, what people do with the files is their business - it is when someone (what I did) puts up an Mp3 or even worse, a transcoded version of FLAC or SHN that the harm comes in. In order to participate - there are protocols and so forth that the majority of the participates must follow - other wise - the deal would not work. What this deal does is place the WE before I - something most people are not very good at. Link to post Share on other sites
burns3 Posted February 17, 2007 Share Posted February 17, 2007 Do we know the original format and source of this show and whether or not the taper attached a disclaimer to it? If you can't figure out BT, your computer should be taken from you. Link to post Share on other sites
HighFives Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 well the thing is if you want it lossless or lossy its not hard to get either one at all... Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 What these tapers are doing, and those who pass on their efforts are doing, is in fact - preserving history. I totally agree with everything your saying and respect your argument. Except, I just won't ever be able to get mad at someone for converting, if I ever feel like getting FLAC files I will, but so many people have hooked me up with great material on mp3 and I am thankful to them. As I am thankful for tapers, and bit torrents. Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 and it's cool that they preserve history in this way, albeit a bit obsessive compulsive at times. still if others prefer smaller, more manageable formats it still doesn't prevent anyone from being a preserver of history. the BT communities mentioned are so utterly anal, that the whole 'pollute the trading argument' doesn't really pass muster as transcoded or inferior recordings are going to be called out and result in suspensions or bannings. it seems that there are really two sorts of people being talked about, and for the most part their paths won't really effect the others enough to justify the stress it seems the cause. as a side bar the comment regarding the ease of BT is really silly. there are plenty of people who don't have the time or inclination to learn that stuff and still want the occasional live show from their favorite band. other people (like me) have difficulties at the ISP level. while I can usually work it out it's generally not worth the hassle of trying to keep my ratio up. after trouble shooting it with nearly every BT geek on the planet it was just time to let it go. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 If people can't do the BT or convert the FLAC deal - they should stick to the old way of B&P. People seem to have next to no patience these days - I wonder why that is. I was looking around at some other boards earlier and noticed some of them have a post no Mp3 tracks policy - they have a very thriving B&P system as a result. I tried to be cool and just share some mostly non-live stuff - I like to share - but no more Mp3. I will gladly walk anyone through converting FLAC files if they want me to help them. That is how I learned - I asked questions, dug around in google, etc. Again, for those who say they don't care, it matters not to them, etc. - you have to see the bigger picture here. Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 do any bands have trading policies that mention preferred formats? getting bands behind the tapers on this would probably help enlighten people at least. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Good question - from what I have seen - it is people making the choice Maybe the people that "run" this place could speak their mind. I do know that Mp3 tracks were not allowed on the VC BT when it was operational - which is keeping with what I have seen out there. Link to post Share on other sites
mountain bed Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 or put it yet another way - Say someone passed on a novel to you that you really wanted to read - Would you want to read the novel as published, or a reader's digest condensed version?That is a great analogy. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 That is a great analogy.I don't think it holds up. (I'm just being sporting here cause its a slow sunday). I would say the mp3 version is like getting the novel in columns on news print as opposed to a nice bound high resolution print. Same info, lower quality, cheaper, faster, higher accesibility, less clarity. It all strikes me as odd considering Wilco and My Morning Jacket (two highly bootleged/traded bands) have mp3's posted on official myspace sites. Record labels stream mp3's of expensive studio recordings. Why is it the tapers get more worked up than studio engineers, record labels, and rock bands? Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Mp3's are lossy - A term describing a data compression algorithm which actually reduces the amount of information in the data, rather than just the number of bits used to represent that information. The lost information is usually removed because it is subjectively less important to the quality of the data (usually an image or sound) or because it can be recovered reasonably by interpolation from the remaining data. MPEG and JPEG are examples of lossy compression techniques. MP3 is a lossy format. Based on the compression settings chosen by the user, some of the audio data is thrown away or 'lost' to decrease the actual compressed file size. This is why the more an MP3 is compressed (low bitrate and sample rate, mono), the poorer the sound quality. As there are some elements in any sound recording that are inaudible to the human ear, MP3s still manage to sound good even with the loss of data Maybe some taper could answer the question - Link to post Share on other sites
HighFives Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 That is a great analogy. not really. You can get lossless if you want with ease. even easier than lossy it seems like. My opinion is that concert downloads should be originally is lossless but it shouldn't be a big deal for lossy files to be around. I mean if you got a group of mp3s like this florence show cool its not like you won't be able to get a lossless version of it just because there are mp3s here. Link to post Share on other sites
Spawn's dad Posted February 18, 2007 Share Posted February 18, 2007 Why is it the tapers get more worked up than studio engineers, record labels, and rock bands? isn't the obvious answer that tapers spend more time and money? actually the pros assume that people getting lossy versions of studio stuff will entice them to buy CDs and see shows. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts