Are mp3 master recordings allowed @TTD???

[AAR.oner]

Originally Posted by LeifH12345

Saying an MP3 source transferred directly to the computer, saved as wav and converted to flac is lossy is like saying a cassette recording handled the same way is lossy. There is no quality lost, and the torrent was pulled. Its not like it was saved as an MP3, then convert to wav> flac. It was saved as wav, then converted to flac.

unless you've modded the iriver with Rockbox or similar, it records in a lossy compressed mp3 state [i.e. before it ever reaches the computer]...just because you then save the file as a wav on the comp does not make the audio lossless...all you have to do is run a SA and FA to see that

being "lossless" its not just about losing quality in the transfer process, its also about lost quality in the source itself...as i said, look at the SA/FAs and you'll see...yer recording, and any mp3 for that matter, typically has no activity above 15 or 16kHz...in other words, a big chunk of your spectrum, in this case the "highs", are completely cut out...and it is noticeable, despite what some folks say

as for our policy, we simply do not allow lossy material here at TTD...we appreciate you recording shows and being willing to share them, but from the beginning, we decided to dedicate this site to only the best quality, which in turn meant only allowing completely lossless recordings...there are numerous other BT sites that would allow the recording tho, and i encourage you to share it at one of those sites

[AAR.oner]

Originally Posted by LeifH12345

You don't seem to understand. In this situation, the MP3 is like the cassette in the tape deck. It wasn't saved that way, it was re-recorded if you will, and saved as wav, then converted to flac and posted. There was no quality lost in the transferring and MP3 files were never involved.

just to clarify, the mp3 source and the cassette master are two completely different things...the mp3, as i explained above, does not include a large part of the frequency spectrum, where as the cassette does...therefor:
cassette > comp [recorded as wav] > flac = lossless
mp3 > comp [recorded as wav] > flac = lossy

it all comes back to the compression--no matter where the mp3 compression occurs, be it the source or in the transfer, it always results in a lossy recording

[mbself]

Originally Posted by LeifH12345

You don't seem to understand. In this situation, the MP3 is like the cassette in the tape deck. It wasn't saved that way, it was re-recorded if you will, and saved as wav, then converted to flac and posted. There was no quality lost in the transferring and MP3 files were never involved.

I am with you to a certain extent......I think we may be out of phase a little bit in what we (you and I) actually agree and disagree on.

--I think that mp3's should be allowed as long as it is the only known source of the show.

--I think that IFmp3's are ever to be allowed there needs to be a way (fingerprinting or checksums or something) to verify an mp3 file as the original, unadulterated mp3 file. I am not swift enough to know how to do this. I think it would be obvious that any show recorded before say 1993 or so would have had little if any chance of having originated as an mp3 file. Maybe there should be a date requirement that states something to the effect of:

Any show taped after 2002 that was recorded as mp3 will be allowed provided it was recorded originally as 320kbps.

--I completely agree with this site's dedication to a more pristine audio pool. I think if TTD ever does decide to allow mp3 MASTERS there should be stringent controls and strict enforcement of bitrate and purity standards.

--If mp3's are ever allowed it should only be segregated to a different section of the traders den. An mp3 masters section with dedicated mods to monitor for bogus posts and sub standard technical requirements. Also, an approved method for packaging the file to protect the integrity of the performance should be adopted and strictly enforced.

[mbself]

Originally Posted by LeifH12345

You don't seem to understand. In this situation, the MP3 is like the cassette in the tape deck. It wasn't saved that way, it was re-recorded if you will, and saved as wav, then converted to flac and posted. There was no quality lost in the transferring and MP3 files were never involved.

on this point we disagree....

it is not fair to say an mp3 file was never involved. The friggin show originated as an mp3 file. the recording software performed lossy compression to save the data in the recorder. Audioarchivist, or whoever, was right when he said it would have been better to allow good software to make the conversion than for an extra digital to analog to digital conversion to occur.

I do think that to most ears a 320kbps mp3 recording sounds as good (if not better due to the lower noise nature of a digital file) as a type I cassette recorded on an average tape deck. But if it ever is allowed, do not go from the mp3 player>line out>line in>wav>flac.....those are wasted steps and will introduce more digital artifacts.

[sbornemann]

Lets take a different point of view. Say in 1969, a single fan recorded a Led Zeppelin concert in Lossy format. Even though its the ONLY recording of this concert, TTD says don't post it because the spectrum peaks at 15kHz? Even if it sounds better than 90% of all Lossless Zep boots? This might be throwing out the baby with the bath water.

[LeifH12345]

Yes, like what if some unheard Robert Johnson recordings were unearthed somehow, and they were considered to be a "lossy master". Would those get pulled?

To clear things up, the recording I made was played through the soundcard of my computer, recorded and saved as wav. files.

[LeifH12345]

Originally Posted by Soreballs

I'm not familiar with iRiver H10, but I know some iRiver models can be upgraded with the 'rockbox' 'firmware' to enable WAVE recording.

Maybe some other knowledgable member here, might be able to shed some light on the situ before you shell out your hard cash for another recorder.

I can only personally wish you the best of luck

Right. Just did some googling and found that or a similar firmware that allows me to record as wav. So, any future shows posted by me that have the lineage: iriver recorder> wav> flac will indeed be wav> flac and no MP3.

[LeifH12345]

BTW, the next show you should see by me is Roger Waters: GM Place 06-21-07.

[Audioarchivist]

Baby with the bathwater. Exactly.
Discounting a perfectly good PERFORMANCE because it was recorded on something you don't like sucks.
It never makes sense to step down a recording to mp3 if it was cd/wav quality. If that option doesn't exist, an mp3 is not that different than a type 1 cassette recorded 30 years ago. Nagra reel recorders seem to show a spectral freqency graph like a MiniDisc. I'm a believer in cassette masters, but I know some tapes I've dealt with had shit for frequency response above 12000, nevermind the 15000 that an mp3 cuts off at. So you should ban my cassette ReMaster by those standards. Where does one draw the line?
Quality should be important, but putting quality above performance is wrong. Look, to me unless it's DVD audio quality or 24bit/96kHz, everything is lossy in digital versus a good clean audiophile analog signal path.
As our technologies baby step up to where they really should be, we have to allow old school stuff to exist, or we will turn our backs on the music we love.

[mbself]

Originally Posted by LeifH12345

Yes, like what if some unheard Robert Johnson recordings were unearthed somehow, and they were considered to be a "lossy master". Would those get pulled?

To clear things up, the recording I made was played through the soundcard of my computer, recorded and saved as wav. files.

i would stop mentioning this.....it is a bad practice. let the software convert to wav----i agree that there are situations where mp3 sources should be allowed....i said so earlier, but never take a digital recording and play it through a computers soundcard to convert it to wav....all kinds of bad shite happens to the data when that happens...let some good mp3 software make the conversion....it is better that way.


If mp3 sources were to be allowed here it needs to be in a place dedicated to mp3 sources.......there is no legitimate reason to upconvert from mp3 to wav to flac or whatever just to put it into a "lossless" format. Since the recording ORIGINATED AS A LOSSY FILE it will never BECOME a LOSSLESS file. I do not care if your capture it through the most expensive a/d converter in the world it is still a lossy file.

We can debate if that matters in the real world, but whether an mp3 capture is in itself lossless....???....it is not. If Microsoft were to release their WMA lossless codec or if the mp3 people came up with their own lossless codec and realesed it to recorder manufacturers then we could talk about all of this.

I also agree that "lossless" is in the eye of the beholder. This site considers "full range" to be relative to the CD standard (red book or green book or blue book or whatver the hell). So by those standards mp3 is lossy becouse the original audio was not captured at a frequency response of about 20-20khz.

I would like to agree with others (including my self) who have noted that old typeI cassettes recorded on bad recorders with bad mics are not as good (and arguably more "lossy") than a good mic to a good mp3 recorder at 320kbps. I would argue that mp3 at 320kbps would probably be as good as many md sourced recordings. But even md sourced recordings are only allowed with certain stipulations.

I do see and sympathize with what you are saying. I wanted badly to be able to use mp3 to record a festival in my hometown this summer. It would have allowed me to record the whole think without having to change media between acts. But when I questioned, it wasn't allowed here. And I understand the reasons for this site doing this. Until there is a change, post your stuff elsewhere.

But do not continue sending the analog signal from your mp3 box to your soundcard. That is not only unecessary and slower than using software....it is bad for the audio and that is what this is all about.

[Five]

No MP3 at TTD

we're like etree & STG in that way

this just isn't the site for it.

It would be a nightmare to moderate... I can see it now... "hey I got this 1976 Jethro Tull show from Limeware and it has never surfaced in lossless! enjoy!"

In special cases we will make an exception, as here but as a general rule just forget it. Seed it somewhere that's mp3-friendly (99.9% of the internet).

[Five]

however, one thing I would like to discuss allowing are cell phone vids. thousands and thousands are shot every night, and show up transcoded on youtube. at a stadium show in a large city you can expect at least one quality audio taper to be there on any given night but with video there is usually nothing, just brief cell phone vids, like the silent 8mm films of the 70s except not silent.

[dcbullet]

Originally Posted by Five

however, one thing I would like to discuss allowing are cell phone vids. thousands and thousands are shot every night, and show up transcoded on youtube. at a stadium show in a large city you can expect at least one quality audio taper to be there on any given night but with video there is usually nothing, just brief cell phone vids, like the silent 8mm films of the 70s except not silent.

How would the cell phone vids be packaged for torrent? A torrent of AVI/MPG files? I guess you could make a VCD out of them?

[U2Lynne]

I can see allowing cell phone vids as filler/alternate angles on a full length DVD, but you aren't going to get a whole concert all captured on a cell phone vid (there isn't enough space on a cell phone to capture a whole concert). What exactly are you suggesting, Jamie?

[AAR.oner]

Originally Posted by Five

however, one thing I would like to discuss allowing are cell phone vids. thousands and thousands are shot every night, and show up transcoded on youtube. at a stadium show in a large city you can expect at least one quality audio taper to be there on any given night but with video there is usually nothing, just brief cell phone vids, like the silent 8mm films of the 70s except not silent.

like lynne said, i can see it useful as filler on a DVD for tape/battery changes [tho i prefer a photo montage]

but it might be opening up a can of worms we probly don't want to deal with if a bunch of partial shows/snippets started popping up...and honestly, the quality on 99.9% of em would be complete shite, way worse than a VCD

i'm not saying i wouldn't like to have one if it was well done for personal viewing, juse like a good quality mp3 master if it was the only known source...but i wonder if opening up the non-lossless gates would lead to a flood of headaches...the vines are bad enough