Topic: How to get a show out...

[chuckcage]

Everyone:

Ok, this is probably a stupid question, but...

I recorded the 10/18 Dallas Blues Traveller show, and it came out quite good.  I only noticed two other tapers (did I really just include myself in that group?) there, and their sources weren't that much better than mine.  (Theirs looks like AKG 391 > DA-P1 to me.)

I haven't heard anything about those sources, so it occurs to me that maybe I should get mine out.  I have two questions:

1. Am I making a mistake distributing mine?

It's from my C1000 > PB224 > AD-20 > NJB3.  Is this not quality enough to put out?

2. Did I handle the show right?

I took my NJB3 file (2 hr set) into CDWav and split it there.  There's no good disc swap point, so it does swap on a segue, but I guess if that really bothered someone and they had a better idea, they could EAC and put it back together however they want.

3. How do I get it out?

What's the best way to get this show out (if I should), and what do I need to know to not make a mess of it.

Thanks in advance for putting up with the stupid newbie question.

Chuck

[BCostigan]

Does the show sound good to you?  Do you think someone else will enjoy listening to your source?  If so then seed it!  

I think the best way to seed is via Bit Torrent personally.

[Kevin]

"1. Am I making a mistake distributing mine?" No, dont sell your recording short everyone has different tastes and im sure lots of people would be happy to listen to that recording.  You could either put it up on furthur, or BT, or B&P it for some folks and it will spread around.  

[Simp-Dawg]

agreed.
if it sounds good, share it!  offer it for trade, b&p, upload, bt, furthur, give it out to friends, etc.
the only "mistake" you could make in distributing a show is by seeding an incomplete/bad-quality show that there is already a known good source for.  as long as there aren't any problems in the recording itself, you have a good source!  
i doubt the blues traveler people are as picky as the pcp (people for a clearer phish) people or the folks on the dankseeds list, where they listen to each and every source to find the perfect one to archive.
don't ever sell your rig short.  we all run what we like or can afford and the two are not always the same...as long as you make the best tapes you can with it, you're doing fine.  a pair of schoeps, a v3, ad2k+, and 24-bit capable laptop can sound like shit if a monkey runs it.
plus, not every taper is always so eager to share their recordings (not the case usually but either they don't have anyone to trade with, don't have time, or don't care) so yours could very well be the only available source right now if there were only 2 other tapers.  get it out there!

[Brian Skalinder]

Not stupid questions at all, Chuck.  Here's my take (bear with me, it's a little longer than I expected)...

1. Am I making a mistake distributing mine?

It's from my C1000 > PB224 > AD-20 > NJB3.  Is this not quality enough to put out?

I don't understand the push by certain groups of people to seed only the single "best" source.  Having lots of source options avilable for a single show is never a bad thing, IMO, for these reasons:

[1]  The equipment used doesn't tell the whole story - lower quality equipment in a better location will generally pull a better tape.  

[2]  Different techniques even using the same gear yield different results.  

[3]  Different gear sounds best to different ears on different playback systems.

2. Did I handle the show right?

I took my NJB3 file (2 hr set) into CDWav and split it there.  There's no good disc swap point, so it does swap on a segue, but I guess if that really bothered someone and they had a better idea, they could EAC and put it back together however they want.

CDWave is a great way to track shows.  Here's how I track mine:

Single disc recordings

•  First track:  2 seconds of silence + ~10 seconds of fade-in before the first song starts.
•  Middle tracks:  each track starts at the very beginning of the song so crowd chatter and band banter is at the end of each track, with exceptions for band intros as a separate track
•  Last track:  ~10 seconds of fade-out after the song ends + 2 seconds of silence

Multi-disc recordings

•  As above, but the last track of disc 1 is a fade-in of the first 10 seconds in disc 2, track 1.
•  As above, but the first track of disc 2 (or 3, or 4) is a fade-out of the last 10 seconds in disc 1 (or 2, or 3...), last track.
•  This allows someone to rip all the discs and then just delete the last and first tracks of the appropriate CDs to seamlessly recompile the WAVs.

3. How do I get it out?

What's the best way to get this show out (if I should), and what do I need to know to not make a mess of it.

As stated by others:  FTP, BT, offer freebies to people on band fan sites who agree to help get it out, etc.

[Swampy]

You also may want to offer it to Dave Mallak (Greenone on ts.com) he is "their quasi-official archivist" as he put it...

[Simp-Dawg]

[/list]Multi-disc recordings

•  As above, but the last track of disc 1 is a fade-in of the first 10 seconds in disc 2, track 1.
•  As above, but the first track of disc 2 (or 3, or 4) is a fade-out of the last 10 seconds in disc 1 (or 2, or 3...), last track.
•  This allows someone to rip all the discs and then just delete the last and first tracks of the appropriate CDs to seamlessly recompile the WAVs.

i think that's a little overkill...but to each his own.  i'm sure it does make for a pleasant listening experience, if only listening to one disc at a time, though if you've got a changer and it can go to the next disc and subsequently right to the next track, it's not a big deal.  also, you're adding additional "tracks" into the set and i wouldn't make the fileset any more complicated than it should be for joe archivist...i just have the tracks laid out, labeled for whichever disk, and let everyone figure out how they want to listen to it.
basically, we are all stupider for having read your post brian, and may god have mercy on your soul.  ;) :P :lol:

[mirth]

Like everybody else has said, if you feel it is a good recording & have the time to do it then by all means yes, seed it.

PCP and Dankseeds had their place, although they are from different perspectives... Dankseeds' main goal was the reseed of old, flawed Dead shows and kinda branched out from there. The main requirements for a dankseed still hold true today... no unnecessary resampling, no SBE's, no DAE if possible.

[Brian Skalinder]

[/list]Multi-disc recordings

•  As above, but the last track of disc 1 is a fade-in of the first 10 seconds in disc 2, track 1.
•  As above, but the first track of disc 2 (or 3, or 4) is a fade-out of the last 10 seconds in disc 1 (or 2, or 3...), last track.
•  This allows someone to rip all the discs and then just delete the last and first tracks of the appropriate CDs to seamlessly recompile the WAVs.

i think that's a little overkill...but to each his own.  i'm sure it does make for a pleasant listening experience, if only listening to one disc at a time, though if you've got a changer and it can go to the next disc and subsequently right to the next track, it's not a big deal.  also, you're adding additional "tracks" into the set and i wouldn't make the fileset any more complicated than it should be for joe archivist...i just have the tracks laid out, labeled for whichever disk, and let everyone figure out how they want to listen to it.
basically, we are all stupider for having read your post brian, and may god have mercy on your soul.  ;) :P :lol:

Yeah, probably a little overkill, but it's really easy to do, takes almost no time, makes for more pleasant listening (on my single-disc player), and shoot - if I'm gonna spend all this money and time taping, I might as well do it right the whole way through.  I find it pretty irrititating to get recordings where a multi-disc set is chopped up poorly, no fades, no idea if music is missing, etc.  Can you say OCD?   ;)

As for Joe Archivist, pretty easy to figure out as I label the tracks "fade-in" and "fade-out" with a note about removing these two tracks to seamlessly recompile.  If the complete show isn't there - as is the case without my method - listeners don't have a choice to recompile and retrack if they want to switch things up.

Blah blah blah...time for bed...as you say, to each his own.  :)

[Lee]

I don't subscribe to the whole fades thing, but that's just me.  When the technology catches up to allow me to put an entire show on one continuous medium (i.e. DVD-Audio, Hard disk, whatever) I don't want the fades left over from where someone had to put a disc cut.  Give me the "rough cut" of the show tracked out for disc, that's all I ask.

But that's just my opinion, I could be wrong...

[John R]

i don't do the fade thing, and i do not track in the middle of a jam.  use more media if you have to.  check the seeding guidelines for naming files on etree.

jr

[Simp-Dawg]

what i really like to do is track each note that trey plays and then play them on random.  trippy, man

[Sean Gallemore]

do you fade em?

[sexymexi]

trade it man,  thats a better source than some of my shows.. and i've traded them, probably cause i'm the only known source for them, nobody else put theirs on..  and i know a couple of the tapers cause i met them at bonnaroo, and 10,000 lakes..  so there are sources out there, but i'm the only one that put it up for trades.. i'd say go for it.   good luck and +T

[Brian Skalinder]

I don't subscribe to the whole fades thing, but that's just me.  When the technology catches up to allow me to put an entire show on one continuous medium (i.e. DVD-Audio, Hard disk, whatever) I don't want the fades left over from where someone had to put a disc cut.  Give me the "rough cut" of the show tracked out for disc, that's all I ask.

Fading properly - as I do - doesn't prevent you from going back and recompiling to put the complete show onto one continuous medium.

Ditto, JR, the ETree tracking guidelines are a good place to start.

[Lee]

I don't subscribe to the whole fades thing, but that's just me.  When the technology catches up to allow me to put an entire show on one continuous medium (i.e. DVD-Audio, Hard disk, whatever) I don't want the fades left over from where someone had to put a disc cut.  Give me the "rough cut" of the show tracked out for disc, that's all I ask.

Fading properly - as I do - doesn't prevent you from going back and recompiling to put the complete show onto one continuous medium.

Ditto, JR, the ETree tracking guidelines are a good place to start.

just curious, what do you define as fading "properly?"  Just fade out at the end of a set?

My concern is if a set runs over 74 minutes, people putting a fade at the disc cut.  That just bothers me

[Brian Skalinder]

just curious, what do you define as fading "properly?"  Just fade-out at the end of a set?

My concern is if a set runs over 74 minutes, people putting a fade at the disc cut.  That just bothers me

A proper fade, IMO, fades in at the beginning and out at the end of a set so there isn't music missing.  This ideally should be done within the 74min mark.  But I was referring specifically to a multi-disc set fading out at the end of the first disc and fading in at the start the second disc such that you can recompile the WAVs seamlessly - as though the fades were never there.  This is a proper fade, IMO, i.e. non-destructive.

I've seen a lot of people split a set between two discs so that it cannot be recompiled seamlessly.  For example:  Cut a 90min set at the 60min mark.  That leaves a 60min first disc and a 30min second disc.  For the sake of simplicity, let's assume they fade-out the last 1 minute on the first disc and fade-in the first 1 minute on the second disc.  (Of course, no one would fade-in/out a full minute, but it makes it easier to illustrate the problem.)  More listenable, sure, but there's a problem:  you can't recompile the WAVs seamlessly.  The fades will always be a part of the recompiled WAVs.  It will recompile fine for the first 59min, then there will be a fade-out from 59min - 60min, followed by a fade-in from 60min - 61min, and finally will recompile fine from 61min - 90min.  This is a destructive fade-in/out.

Visually, the two situations look like this.  Start at 0 minutes on the left, 90 minutes on the right.  A = the 1min fade-out on the first disc, B = the 1min fade-in on the second disc.

DESTRUCTIVE FADE
0....5...10...15...20...25...30...35...40...45...50...55...60...65...70...75...80...90
--------------------------CD1-WAVs-------------------------A
                                                            B--------CD2-WAVs---------

As you can see, the two discs cannot be recompiled seamlessly, the fade-in (A) and fade-out (B) will always remain in the recompiled WAVs:

DESTRUCTIVE FADE, RE-COMPILED WITH FADES
0....5...10...15...20...25...30...35...40...45...50...55...60...65...70...75...80...90
--------------------------CD1-WAVs-------------------------AB--------CD2-WAVs---------

Or, if we remove the fades outright, we're now missing the A/B fade content in our re-compiled WAV:

DESTRUCTIVE FADE, RECOMPILED W/O FADES
0....5...10...15...20...25...30...35...40...45...50...55...60...65...70...75...80...90
--------------------------CD1-WAVs-------------------------  --------CD2-WAVs---------

And now, the example of non-destructive fades - these fades overlap one another precisely, so we can remove the fades outright and still recompile the WAV seamlessly.  Sure, we're duplicating the fade content, but that doesn't really matter IMO - far more important to allow for seamless WAV recompilation. 

NON-DESTRUCTIVE FADE
0....5...10...15...20...25...30...35...40...45...50...55...60...65...70...75...80...90
--------------------CD1-WAVs-recompile-OK-------------------A
                                                           B---CD2-WAVs-recompile-OK--

As you can see, with a non-destructive fade, if you remove the fade-in (A) and fade-out (B) and recompile, you're left with only the complete set of unedited music (i.e. no fades in the recompilation), no missing content:

NON-DESTRUCTIVE FADE RECOMPILED
0....5...10...15...20...25...30...35...40...45...50...55...60...65...70...75...80...90
--------------------CD1-WAVs-recompile-OK----------------------CD2-WAVs-recompile-OK--

Phew.  Anyone who read all that...needs to get a life!   

[John R]

does anyone actually use 74's anymore?

jr

[Brian Skalinder]

does anyone actually use 74's anymore?

I don't use 'em, but I track everything to 74min, unless the show will fit on a single 80.  Just habit, I guess...

[Sean Gallemore]

i can't even find them in stores, 74 that is

[Lee]

just curious, what do you define as fading "properly?"  Just fade-out at the end of a set?

My concern is if a set runs over 74 minutes, people putting a fade at the disc cut.  That just bothers me

A proper fade, IMO, fades in at the beginning and out at the end of a set so there isn't music missing.  This ideally should be done within the 74min mark.  But I was referring specifically to a multi-disc set fading out at the end of the first disc and fading in at the start the second disc such that you can recompile the WAVs seamlessly - as though the fades were never there.  This is a proper fade, IMO.

I've seen a lot of people split a set between two discs so that it cannot be recompiled seamlessly.  For example:  Cut a 90min set at the 60min mark.  That leaves a 60min first disc and a 30min second disc.  For the sake of simplicity, let's assume they fade-out the last 1 minute on the first disc and fade-in the first 1 minute on the second disc.  (Of course, no one would fade-in/out a full minute, but it makes it easier to illustrate the problem.)  More listenable, sure, but there's a problem:  you can't recompile the WAVs seamlessly.  The fades will always be a part of the recompiled WAVs.  It will recompile fine for the first 59min, then there will be a fade-out from 59min - 60min, followed by a fade-in from 60min - 61min, and finally will recompile fine from 61min - 90min.  This I define as an improper fade-in/out.

Visually, the two situations look like this.  Start at 0 minutes on the left, 90 minutes on the right.  A = the 1min fade-out on the first disc, B = the 1min fade-in on the second disc.

IMPROPER FADE

0....5...10...15...20...25...30...35...40...45...50...55...60...65...70...75...80...90
--------------------------CD1-WAVs-------------------------A
                                                            B--------CD2-WAVs---------

As you can see, the two discs cannot be recompiled seamlessly, the fade-in (A) and fade-out (B) will always remain in the recompiled WAVs.

PROPER FADE

0....5...10...15...20...25...30...35...40...45...50...55...60...65...70...75...80...90
--------------------CD1-WAVs-recompile-OK-------------------A
                                                           B---CD2-WAVs-recompile-OK--

As you can see, with a proper fade, if you remove the fade-in (A) and fade-out (B) and recompile, you're left with only the complete set of unedited music (i.e. no fades in the recompilation):

0....5...10...15...20...25...30...35...40...45...50...55...60...65...70...75...80...90
--------------------CD1-WAVs-recompile-OK-------------------
                                                            ---CD2-WAVs-recompile-OK--

Phew.  Anyone who read all that...needs to get a life!  

Guess I need a life.  That makes sense, I guess I'm just too lazy to do fades.  

+T Skalinder, you should put that in the archive.  "The TS.com standard / Skalinder method for applying fades"

[jhirte]

Doesn't matter man, its another source. I try to get all the sources for shows as possible!! Maybe I'm just a freak! heeh.

-Jim

[Sean Gallemore]

if it's anything good, send it to me and I'll get it out for you