victor fleitas
So... This is the best version avaliable till now? I mean, Both Audio And Video? the best source for the audio?
Thread
Posts in chronological order
RoyThomasBaker
Thanks a lot!
deltazulu
[QUOTE]
[b]victor fleitas wrote: [/b]
So... This is the best version avaliable till now? I mean, Both Audio And Video? the best source for the audio?
[/QUOTE]
yes
[b]victor fleitas wrote: [/b]
So... This is the best version avaliable till now? I mean, Both Audio And Video? the best source for the audio?
[/QUOTE]
yes
eYe
Thank You !
[img=/images/smiley/msn/thumbs_up.gif][/img]
[img=/images/smiley/msn/thumbs_up.gif][/img]
gaspar
I say thank you so much!
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE]
[b]TimBHM wrote: [/b]
it cannot magically restore the data that was lost when it was converted to AC3 in the first place.
[/QUOTE]
Right. But if you compare this to the original version, it sounds heaps better. For some reason, each individual channel sounded fine, but together they sounded awful. So, one channel was removed by Tgunn, and he doubled the volume - but this caused a couple of the songs to distort on that version. This version then has one channel removed, but the volume remains the same.
[b]TimBHM wrote: [/b]
it cannot magically restore the data that was lost when it was converted to AC3 in the first place.
[/QUOTE]
Right. But if you compare this to the original version, it sounds heaps better. For some reason, each individual channel sounded fine, but together they sounded awful. So, one channel was removed by Tgunn, and he doubled the volume - but this caused a couple of the songs to distort on that version. This version then has one channel removed, but the volume remains the same.
daffy_the_duck
So, if I understand correctly the audio was left in lpcm in order to avoid another loss in a 2nd ac3 compression, am I right?
But I have another silly problem: If we remove one channel don't we lose information too?
e.g. in "Who needs you" in NOTW, we can hear the intro guitar on one channel but not on the 2nd ,commonly called stereo... I guess ;)
If I separate the 2 channels and left only one I lost either vocals or some guitars, so didn't we lose something here?
I took Who needs you as an example because it's easily identifiable for those who wonder why ;)
But I have another silly problem: If we remove one channel don't we lose information too?
e.g. in "Who needs you" in NOTW, we can hear the intro guitar on one channel but not on the 2nd ,commonly called stereo... I guess ;)
If I separate the 2 channels and left only one I lost either vocals or some guitars, so didn't we lose something here?
I took Who needs you as an example because it's easily identifiable for those who wonder why ;)
Dodger Taylor
As it was only a mono audio anyway both left and right channels would be the same so no information is lost.But had it been in stereo you would be right in what you are sayin (I think lol)
The Real Wizard
Indeed, this is a mono recording, so no information is lost by simply removing one of the channels. It's an odd duck, I know, but trust me... this should be the best-sounding version so far.
little foetus
This recording is mono so you don't lose anything by removing one channel.
TimBHM
[QUOTE]
[b]daffy_the_duck wrote: [/b]
So, if I understand correctly the audio was left in lpcm in order to avoid another loss in a 2nd ac3 compression, am I right?
[/QUOTE]
Yes that's exactly it I guess. As I mentioned in another thread, you cannot guarantee that a lossy compression algorithm will not remove even more data when re-compressed. This is certainly the case if you transcode to another lossy algorithm say MP3 > WAV > AC3
[b]daffy_the_duck wrote: [/b]
So, if I understand correctly the audio was left in lpcm in order to avoid another loss in a 2nd ac3 compression, am I right?
[/QUOTE]
Yes that's exactly it I guess. As I mentioned in another thread, you cannot guarantee that a lossy compression algorithm will not remove even more data when re-compressed. This is certainly the case if you transcode to another lossy algorithm say MP3 > WAV > AC3
tgunn2760
[QUOTE]
[b]little foetus wrote: [/b]
This recording is mono so you don't lose anything by removing one channel.
[/QUOTE]
Right.
And for some reason, the decompressed audio sounds much better and louder than the AC3 audio.
The original AC3 audio was much too low.
The video looks pixilated and a little generated to me, so I would not be surprised if a better version
shows up in the future.
Overall I would say the audio and video are both solid A-
[b]little foetus wrote: [/b]
This recording is mono so you don't lose anything by removing one channel.
[/QUOTE]
Right.
And for some reason, the decompressed audio sounds much better and louder than the AC3 audio.
The original AC3 audio was much too low.
The video looks pixilated and a little generated to me, so I would not be surprised if a better version
shows up in the future.
Overall I would say the audio and video are both solid A-
TimBHM
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
Indeed, this is a mono recording, so no information is lost by simply removing one of the channels. It's an odd duck, I know, but trust me... this should be the best-sounding version so far.
[/QUOTE]
Ah right, so in that version someone had taken a mono track and copied it into a second channel to give two channels with exactly the same data in them? The thing that confused me is that AC3 is Dolby Digital's format which is geared up to take 6 channels (5.1)...! So I was scratching my head wondering which channel had been axed...!
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
Indeed, this is a mono recording, so no information is lost by simply removing one of the channels. It's an odd duck, I know, but trust me... this should be the best-sounding version so far.
[/QUOTE]
Ah right, so in that version someone had taken a mono track and copied it into a second channel to give two channels with exactly the same data in them? The thing that confused me is that AC3 is Dolby Digital's format which is geared up to take 6 channels (5.1)...! So I was scratching my head wondering which channel had been axed...!
pittrek
[QUOTE]
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]TimBHM wrote: [/b]
it cannot magically restore the data that was lost when it was converted to AC3 in the first place.
[/QUOTE]
Right. But if you compare this to the original version, it sounds heaps better. For some reason, each individual channel sounded fine, but together they sounded awful. So, one channel was removed by Tgunn, and he doubled the volume - but this caused a couple of the songs to distort on that version. This version then has one channel removed, but the volume remains the same.
[/QUOTE]
OK so now I understood what is the difference between this version and my version :) I hope it stays seeded until I can start with the download :)
[b]Sir GH wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]TimBHM wrote: [/b]
it cannot magically restore the data that was lost when it was converted to AC3 in the first place.
[/QUOTE]
Right. But if you compare this to the original version, it sounds heaps better. For some reason, each individual channel sounded fine, but together they sounded awful. So, one channel was removed by Tgunn, and he doubled the volume - but this caused a couple of the songs to distort on that version. This version then has one channel removed, but the volume remains the same.
[/QUOTE]
OK so now I understood what is the difference between this version and my version :) I hope it stays seeded until I can start with the download :)
pittrek
[QUOTE]
[b]tgunn2760 wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]little foetus wrote: [/b]
This recording is mono so you don't lose anything by removing one channel.
[/QUOTE] Right.
And for some reason, the decompressed audio sounds much better and louder than the AC3 audio.
The original AC3 audio was much too low.
The video looks pixilated and a little generated to me, so I would not be surprised if a better version
shows up in the future.
Overall I would say the audio and video are both solid A-
[/QUOTE]
It's normal. A properly encoded ac3 file is always more silent then the wav file
[b]tgunn2760 wrote: [/b]
[QUOTE]
[b]little foetus wrote: [/b]
This recording is mono so you don't lose anything by removing one channel.
[/QUOTE] Right.
And for some reason, the decompressed audio sounds much better and louder than the AC3 audio.
The original AC3 audio was much too low.
The video looks pixilated and a little generated to me, so I would not be surprised if a better version
shows up in the future.
Overall I would say the audio and video are both solid A-
[/QUOTE]
It's normal. A properly encoded ac3 file is always more silent then the wav file