Topic: ? ? ?

[Josephine]

I'm almost too bummed to even post asking for help, guys. 
For the life of me, I don't understand.

A friend of mine torrented the U2 show I recorded Wed. with my MK41s < nbox <D100.
I just got home from work to find an email from a buddy of mine from this board letting me know that Dimeadozen (a.k.a. EZT) banned the show, saying it was "of lossy quality. apparently everything above 16khz is cut off."

I don't get it . . . .    Can someone tell me what happened?

[leegeddy]

I'm almost too bummed to even post asking for help, guys. 
For the life of me, I don't understand.

A friend of mine torrented the U2 show I recorded Wed. with my MK41s < nbox <D100.
I just got home from work to find an email from a buddy of mine from this board letting me know that Dimeadozen (a.k.a. EZT) banned the show, saying it was "of lossy quality. apparently everything above 16khz is cut off."

I don't get it . . . .    Can someone tell me what happened?

there are some morons out there who doesn't even know what "16kHz" really mean, so i wouldn't take it personally. 

but.....

by any chance you recorded the show in LP mode (32khz sampling)?

marc

[creekfreak]

did someone change it before torrenting it?

[F.O.Bean]

hmm, thats weird, take its w/ a grain of salt, some people are just morons

you got your first bite of a torrent ehh   sux huh

[Josephine]

First thing I did was check to make sure the switch didn't get switched to LP.  It's not that.

And no, the show was not touched before it was torrented.  I ftp'd it to a friend who tracked and torrented it for me.  He did nothing to it.

 

[creekfreak]

First thing I did was check to make sure the switch didn't get switched to LP.  It's not that.

And no, the show was not touched before it was torrented.  I ftp'd it to a friend who tracked and torrented it for me.  He did nothing to it.

 

hmm...what did he use to track it?

[Josephine]

Soundforge 7

[setboy]

Soundforge 7

could have he/she hit something esle when tracking and not know it?

Raphael

[hexyjones]

http://www.dimeadozen.org/torrents-details.php?id=36501

[creekfreak]

Soundforge 7

could have he/she hit something esle when tracking and not know it?

Raphael

thats what I was thinking, maybe had some setting that resamped it as it cut it...does the master have any issues?

[Josephine]

Soundforge 7

could have he/she hit something esle when tracking and not know it?

Raphael

thats what I was thinking, maybe had some setting that resamped it as it cut it...does the master have any issues?

My buddy has done so many shows before, I kind of doubt that's the case --  since I don't really understand what the "issue" is, Creekfreak, I can't really tell you if the "master has any issues." 
What am I supposed to look for?

[hexyjones]

Heres what they are using as the proof...

[F.O.Bean]

does it sound good thats all that should effin matter

[JasonSobel]

does it sound good thats all that should effin matter

exactly.  maybe there wasn't any sound above 16kHz coming out of the PA to begin with??

[hexyjones]

does it sound good thats all that should effin matter

exactly.  maybe there wasn't any sound above 16kHz coming out of the PA to begin with??

Thats what I considered also - but with applause/crowd you would think there would be more activity up there...

I have some older mics that - I - like the sound of - and they're only flat 40-13,000 - nice and warm...better not seed at EZT.

[Ed.]

i hate nontapers that think the freq analysis is always right.  they know nothing.

their loss if you ask me.

[Josephine]

does it sound good thats all that should effin matter

exactly.  maybe there wasn't any sound above 16kHz coming out of the PA to begin with??

Would the fact that I was located in the very last row of the farthest section of balcony (basically almost on the ceiling) have this kind of affect?  Here's a link to the seating chart:

http://www.ticketmaster.com/seatingchart/73985/12762

I was in the very last row of Section 310.
 

[F.O.Bean]

for sure, high freq's are lost the furthur away from the source, but wtf, justcause your tapes dont have anything over 16k doesnt mean squat, hell, most of us that have been to many shows prolly cant hear that high of a freq anyway

[jaguaracer]

hell, most of us that have been to many shows prolly cant hear that high of a freq anyway

I think its been pretty much proved all of us (unless you're under 18) can't hear past 16 khz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearing_%28sense%29

[macdaddy]

you used the same gear to record the dylan show the other week, right..? do a FA of that and see what the results are...

[hexyjones]

for sure, high freq's are lost the furthur away from the source, but wtf, justcause your tapes dont have anything over 16k doesnt mean squat, hell, most of us that have been to many shows prolly cant hear that high of a freq anyway

Yeah - but mk41s can, and should hear - something - in that range...?

I hate to say it - but after a few quick experiments - that spectral does look an awful lot like what mp3 does to the freq resp...

Sure some thing didnt go haywire in the transfer...?

[Josephine]

I'm going to compare the torrented version (which I downloaded) to the original track which I sent out . . . check to see if there is any difference.

[leegeddy]

I'm going to compare the torrented version (which I downloaded) to the original track which I sent out . . . check to see if there is any difference.

josephine;

you can just transfer a short sample from your master DAT and look at the freq. and spectral analysis.

marc

[macdaddy]

I'm going to compare the torrented version (which I downloaded) to the original track which I sent out . . . check to see if there is any difference.

that'll do it...

i am thinking the save as was set to mp3 not wav

[hexyjones]

I'm going to compare the torrented version (which I downloaded) to the original track which I sent out . . . check to see if there is any difference.

If they are the same - then you will need to go back the DAT and sample a few seconds for comparison...

How was the transfer done?

[Josephine]

I'm going to compare the torrented version (which I downloaded) to the original track which I sent out . . . check to see if there is any difference.

that'll do it...

i am thinking the save as was set to mp3 not wav

They're the same    

Okay . . .  I imagine this is where I'm going to start to sound REALLY, REALLY DENSE.     How do I "sample" some of the DAT?  Just transfer a small portion and compare it against the others?

[JasonSobel]

How do I "sample" some of the DAT?  Just transfer a small portion and compare it against the others?

exactly, just retransfer a few minutes of it, and compare the FA of that new .wav with what you've already got on your computer.

[hexyjones]

I'm going to compare the torrented version (which I downloaded) to the original track which I sent out . . . check to see if there is any difference.

that'll do it...

i am thinking the save as was set to mp3 not wav

They're the same   

Okay . . .  I imagine this is where I'm going to start to sound REALLY, REALLY DENSE.     How do I "sample" some of the DAT?  Just transfer a small portion and compare it against the others?

The same way you did the transfer for the file you FTPed...

Just do a few seconds -

Was this a digital transfer? or are you using analog in to a  soundcard?...which might explain a lot...

[macdaddy]

I'm going to compare the torrented version (which I downloaded) to the original track which I sent out . . . check to see if there is any difference.

that'll do it...

i am thinking the save as was set to mp3 not wav

They're the same   

Okay . . .  I imagine this is where I'm going to start to sound REALLY, REALLY DENSE.     How do I "sample" some of the DAT?  Just transfer a small portion and compare it against the others?

exactly...

make sure your record function is set to the sample rate at which you recorded (the dat machine will tell you that in the display upon playback)...

record 1 minute of music, and then stop, save the WAV (without altering it in any way)and analyze.

[Depechemode1993]

Josephine-
     +T for all the efforts. I am sure there is an explanation for this. I remember this happened to my New Order 89 master. when I transfered it the first time it was all under 16 Khz. then when I re transfered it it was fine. did you save the File Wav (Windows PCM Wav)?? or another wav type becasue sometimes that will do it. but anyways. you get a t just for that. thos people over at DIME that are bitchin can fork themselves! 

[John R]

yeah, screw 'em.  i'll host it for you.

[Josephine]

In answer to corkscrew ~ it is a digital tranfer.  I'm transferring my DAT to my home stereo CD-RW deck.

I've made a short sample off the DAT . . . but I'm not sure how to "analyze" it.  I don't know what "FA" means    I've got Soundforge.

You guys are really great.  Thanks so much for trying to help me figure this out.

[Brian]

so you EAC'ed the CD's to your computer to work with in Sound Forge?

did you save those files as mp3's? check your computer.  re EAC the original CDR transfers and compare

[muddguts]

hey all,

first time poster, non taper I am however Josephine's friend that seeded the show. I don't believe anything went wrong with Sound Forge, here is a screenshot of one of the files attributes. Unless I am missing something, it seems fine to me.

[Josephine]

so you EAC'ed the CD's to your computer to work with in Sound Forge?

did you save those files as mp3's? check your computer.  re EAC the original CDR transfers and compare

I saved them as .wav files in Soundforge before I ftp'd them.  Just double-checked to make sure I didn't mess up my settings somehow.

[hexyjones]

In answer to corkscrew ~ it is a digital tranfer.  I'm transferring my DAT to my home stereo CD-RW deck.

I've made a short sample off the DAT . . . but I'm not sure how to "analyze" it.  I don't know what "FA" means    I've got Soundforge.

You guys are really great.  Thanks so much for trying to help me figure this out.

Ahh...Im a big skeptic of standalone CD-R/W units...

I had a Marantz CDR 610 - and the differnce between the source and the clone was obvious...

Caveat: that was first gen pro-sumer technology...back in 93. YMMV

[Brian]

hmmmmm.  i'm really at a loss.  is there a way we can get a frequency analysis of just the crowd cheering?

[leegeddy]

are you absolutely sure your recording isn't at 32khz?

an easy way to verify is to play your DAT and hold down the play button. your D100 will show what the sampling freq. is.  "F ##".

marc

[hexyjones]

I betting on the DAT > Standalone CD-RW unit combo as the culprit...

Do those things really make bit perfect copies or just "copies"?

It wouldn't be a suprise to find some resampling going on in the CDR unit...

[Brian]

if her original recording was at 32kHz, then the 44.1 transfer would sound sped up, no?

it's possible the CDRW deck resampled down from 44.1 to 32 but then the transfer to SF would sound sped up.

[Josephine]

are you absolutely sure your recording isn't at 32khz?

an easy way to verify is to play your DAT and hold down the play button. your D100 will show what the sampling freq. is.  "F ##".

marc

  "F 32"  Guess that answers that, then . . .   
Thanks so much for all the help, guys . . .  I didn't mean to run you around in circles. 
I don't imagine there is a way to repair that?

[nickgregory]

unfortunately not...but if it is worth anything, I have made the same error...best thing you can do going forward, tape down those switches when stelathing...they will flip at the worst time..sometimes...

+T

[creekfreak]

glad you figured it out, hate it when shit like that happens that seems unexplainable, but hey, thats what you have us for Made that mistake a few times myself when I ran a D8

[hexyjones]

HA!

If its any consolation to the EZT folks - this at least proves that the recording was not LOSSY!!!

Just recorded at using an older digital spec...32/12 bit (I think)

PLENTY of older stuff circulating that was recorded using this technology...if you look hard enough there might even be some on EZT now!

Note - this doesnt rule out some monkeying around by your CD-RW...IMO - obviously it changed the sample rate to 44.1 in some fashion...

It may be best to get a proper digital transfer done so you can use some industrial strength upsampling!

[muddguts]

If its any consolation to the EZT folks - this at least proves that the recording was not LOSSY!!!

I don't know a whole lot about frequencies but is that for sure? that this is not techincally a lossy recording?
That's the biggest issue right now, that we were told it's lossy hence the reason for it being banned.
I'd like to be positive about it and perhaps let them know this but I want to be sure.

thanks for all your help folks.

[Josephine]

You guys are wonderful.  Thanks for all the help and for cheering me up a bit.
I just went through this thread to make sure I gave everyone a much deserved +t.  And I'm going to do it again in 12.

I just pulled out my Dr. John tape I recorded Friday night in fear it might indicate I recorded in 32 as well, thankfully that's not the case.
This botched U2 tape of mine means one thing -- I'll be at one of the two U2 shows come November when they pass back through Los Angeles. 

[hexyjones]

If its any consolation to the EZT folks - this at least proves that the recording was not LOSSY!!!

I don't know a whole lot about frequencies but is that for sure? that this is not techincally a lossy recording?
That's the biggest issue right now, that we were told it's lossy hence the reason for it being banned.
I'd like to be positive about it and perhaps let them know this but I want to be sure.

thanks for all your help folks.

2 channel 32KHz Sample Rate, 12-bit non-linear encoding, 240 min max
Frequency Response 2-14.5KHz (+-0.5dB)
        SN = 92 dB   DR = 92 dB

Not lossy - just old - this is the original Sony Spec that I think the old Sony F-1 units used...

The frequency response is not as broad as one would like...but it still sounds very nice.

The concept of lossy has to do with file compression...there is no lossy compression in play here...

[leegeddy]

Note - this doesnt rule out some monkeying around by your CD-RW...IMO - obviously it changed the sample rate to 44.1 in some fashion...

it actually does. freq. response in LP 32khz is limited.

not to sound like a smartass, but as soon as i saw the freq. and spectral analysis i had a strong hunch that it was the sampling frequency.  (in the past, i've recorded at LP 32khz on purpose and looked at the wave).

marc

[hexyjones]

Note - this doesnt rule out some monkeying around by your CD-RW...IMO - obviously it changed the sample rate to 44.1 in some fashion...

it actually does. freq. response in LP 32khz is limited.

not to sound like a smartass, but as soon as i saw the freq. and spectral analysis i had a strong hunch that it was the sampling frequency.  (in the past, i've recorded at LP 32khz on purpose and looked at the wave).

marc

Good call - looking back at the thread - Josphine said - "checked the switch" - not as good as putting the tape in...

But still - I see the CD-RW stage as a flaw - perhaps not tragic ( and to agree with leegeedy - not the cause of the limited freq resp...) - but if you can avoid it - I would bet that resampling on a computer would do a higher quality job versus the standalone on the fly resampling...

[L Ron Hoover]

I too have had the SBM1 switch to 32k while stealthing. It's happened to a lot more people than you think. Get a piece of gaffers tape and tape the switch to 44.1 or 48. (whichever you prefer-I go with 48)

As for digital transfers to a standalone, this is still what I do. I think my eight year old Pioneer(HHB) does a decent job resampling on the fly.

+T for your efforts.


+T Moke (I was gonna mention that I thought you used a standalone as well)

[John R]

Not knowing what unit Josephine transfered with,....
The Tascam 700 does a fine job of reampling 48k > 44.1, and has a digital direct mode for 44.1 masters. I think it sounds great.

qft

[hexyjones]

I think I've let my experieces with the old Marantz 610 CD recorder color my opinion a bit...

I can remember cloning "Salsbury Hill" when we were testing the unit...

As soon as the acoustic guitar started - frowns all around. There was huge difference that ANYONE could have heard.

(I worked for a high end dealer - so Im sure we tried a few different transports, DIPs etc...)

I also remember taking the thing to a guys studio to clone some demo tracks he had on a DAT - You could hear the difference. I could tell he was disappointed. As was I.

Im sure things have improved...

[robertd]

I too have had the SBM1 switch to 32k while stealthing. It's happened to a lot more people than you think. Get a piece of gaffers tape and tape the switch to 44.1 or 48. (whichever you prefer-I go with 48)

it happened to me just once and after that I taped the switch down.
those flat switches on Sony stuff can get moved pretty easily.

on Friday I stealthed a metal show and was standing just outside the mosh pit with gear in a fanny pack.
during all the jostling and pushing, the gain on the SBM-1 got cranked all the way up for the last part of Mastodon's set.
there's always something but live and learn.

[fozzy]

Did 2 shows a few weeks back w/ the SBM1 @ 32k (after 50-75 shows w/o moving the switch) didn't notice till the band was walking onstage for the third show in three days.  +t for your troubles. 

[pfife]

Yup... I've done the same w/ the SBM-1.  Also, I think someone had just posted how they hit the switch on their dat during the show...  I've also missed significant portions of the beginnig of a set trying to figure out why no levels were registering, only to notice that the SBM-1 was turned to "mic-in" and not "line-in" -


To me, stuff like this is the most frustrating thing about taping - purchase expensive tickets, think about the sick tape your going to pull for x number of weeks, and then f it up... its a total bummer.  +t Josephine... sux...

[macdaddy]

this is why i took the switches off of the sbm1 (sample rate + mic-in/line-in). the switch pops off, and then you can always set with a toothick, but i leave mine at 48 kHz and line-in...

saves the headache...

[hexyjones]

torrent UNBANNED!

[leegeddy]

DIME BAN LIFTED!

The taper sent the following informations to an user, who forwarded them to us :
The show is not lossy.  After much investigation last night, I discovered
that it was inadvertantly recorded at 32KHz.  Apparently the swith on the
D100 was changed, most likely while the unit was being jostled inside my
purse.

2 channel 32KHz Sample Rate, 12-bit non-linear encoding, 240 min max
Frequency Response 2-14.5KHz (+-0.5dB)
       SN = 92 dB   DR = 92 dB

Not lossy - just old.  I was told this is the original Sony Spec that the
old Sony F-1 units used...

32KHz Sample Rate w/ 12-bit encoding is not much better than a good mp3 encoding and can't be considered as "lossless", in the usual sense of this term. But, as long as this is the best recording from this show, and given that the lineage is now complete, this show can run.

 

marc

[hexyjones]

I know, I know...

[Josephine]

I come home on my lunch hour to find out the wonderful news.
Thanks so much for all your help and thanks to those of you who posted over at Dimeadozen.
It was your words, your assistance that got the torrent back up and running.

Corkscrew ~ thanks for your detailed description of 32KHz (which I boorrowed  ) . . . . I guess that's what they needed to hear.

Last night I sent a response to one of the users over there who wrote me wanting to know what was "wrong" with the show.  Apparently he forwarded my explanation to the moderators.

You guys rock !!! 
Another round of +t's for my buddies here at TS.

[creekfreak]

+T back...thats why I love this place...you can mobilize an army of internet support in no time....whether it's taking down ebay auctions, or bugging people until they change their minds we aim to please I know I didn't help much, but its fun to watch the help cascade to literally 20-30 people, and people think this board is going down hill