Queen crest Queenzone

ANNOUNCE: 24.10.1982 Osaka/Nishinomiya, Japan COMPLETE FLAC

54 posts Page 2 of 4
Thread

Posts in chronological order

Search forum
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]TheGame wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Nice to see something actually happening, and perhaps we get the snowball running ourselves.
I`ve decided to share something from my collection also in lossless. I dont know what yet.
However, i have to wait until i`ve fixed my computer. Yes, it have died again, unbelievable!
[/QUOTE]

Ah man, I'm sorry to hear that... again!
Queenzone is overrun with trolls and circling the drain - join us here instead: http://queenforum.net
THX.
Look out, take care, there's a lot of music out there...
(use nero express to burn & dont forget to tick the box to remove the 2 second gaps between songs)

Flac plugin for nero.....

http://www.bitburners.com/Nero_Audio_Plugins_by_MauSau/


follow the instructions to install and then burn your lossless flacs in nero as you would your orrible ,nasty ,lossy mp3's...hehehe.
Now you have EXACTLY what was recorded on THE night.




LOSSLESS v LOSSY

I try to keep my terminology straight. In other words, I refer to lossy codecs as encoders, and lossless codecs as compressors. It's a subtle difference, and one you'll see ignored by some people, who use the terms interchangably [encoder & compressor].

But lossless codecs do not "encode" per se. They merely compress [crunch]. Lossy codecs, on the other hand, do more than compress:
they encode, which involves discarding selected bits deemed unnecessary.

It's a known fact that the human ear has difficulty detecting a soft note played immediately after a loud one [e.g. a quiet whisper following a loud shout]. The lossy encoder will see this and discard the bits representing soft notes immediately following loud ones.

The goal here is to generate a smaller file with [hopefully] minimal loss of audio fidelity. It's also known that humans have trouble hearing sounds above 16-KHz.

This is why lossy codecs will discard all audio information above the 16-KHz threshold when they're configured to output the smallest possible files [lowest bit-rates].

Most of the time, lossy encoders makes good decisions regarding which bits of audio information to keep and which bits to discard. But not always. Certain types of music are more difficult to encode than others. [Music that contains a lot of "transients" is particularly difficult to encode.]

Music that is more difficult to encode has a greater chance of 'tricking' the encoder into making poor decisions about which bits keep/discard. This is especially true with lower bit-rate files [<128-kbps], where each bit is crucial to preserving the quality of the music.

___________________________________
As Freddie said..."I WANT IT ALL"

Last note:
Imagine yourself in the future for a minute.

You've got your mp3(which was lossy to start with) ,and you've put it on your CD to play as normal.
...a year later you decide to share ,so you rip it into Mp3 again - losing more from what was already lost to start with.
And the cycle continues.
In 10 years time YOU will be complaining that the quality isnt good on that show.

..This is why you need to learn about lossless

Same with video
___________________________________
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]928 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]It's a known fact that the human ear has difficulty detecting a soft note played immediately after a loud one [e.g. a quiet whisper following a loud shout]. The lossy encoder will see this and discard the bits representing soft notes immediately following loud ones.

The goal here is to generate a smaller file with [hopefully] minimal loss of audio fidelity. It's also known that humans have trouble hearing sounds above 16-KHz.

This is why lossy codecs will discard all audio information above the 16-KHz threshold when they're configured to output the smallest possible files [lowest bit-rates].

Most of the time, lossy encoders makes good decisions regarding which bits of audio information to keep and which bits to discard. But not always. Certain types of music are more difficult to encode than others. [Music that contains a lot of "transients" is particularly difficult to encode.]

Music that is more difficult to encode has a greater chance of 'tricking' the encoder into making poor decisions about which bits keep/discard. This is especially true with lower bit-rate files [<128-kbps], where each bit is crucial to preserving the quality of the music.[/QUOTE]

Very interesting post!
Queenzone is overrun with trolls and circling the drain - join us here instead: http://queenforum.net
Tatterdemalion, you're great! Many thanks!

Is there anybody willing to put the show up as a torrent if he has downloaded it completely? IMO files of that size are better to handle as torrent, it takes longer, but you don't have to think about (or pay for) the download.
... I'll be back again before it's time for sunny-down ...
I prefer a torrent too. But thanks anyway for uploading. Great concert!
You made us laugh, you made us cry, you made us feel like we could fly!
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]928 wrote: [/QUOTENAME](use nero express to burn & dont forget to tick the box to remove the 2 second gaps between songs)

Flac plugin for nero.....

http://www.bitburners.com/Nero_Audio_Plugins_by_MauSau/


follow the instructions to install and then burn your lossless flacs in nero as you would your orrible ,nasty ,lossy mp3's...hehehe.
Now you have EXACTLY what was recorded on THE night.




LOSSLESS v LOSSY

I try to keep my terminology straight. In other words, I refer to lossy codecs as encoders, and lossless codecs as compressors. It's a subtle difference, and one you'll see ignored by some people, who use the terms interchangably [encoder & compressor].

But lossless codecs do not "encode" per se. They merely compress [crunch]. Lossy codecs, on the other hand, do more than compress:
they encode, which involves discarding selected bits deemed unnecessary.

It's a known fact that the human ear has difficulty detecting a soft note played immediately after a loud one [e.g. a quiet whisper following a loud shout]. The lossy encoder will see this and discard the bits representing soft notes immediately following loud ones.

The goal here is to generate a smaller file with [hopefully] minimal loss of audio fidelity. It's also known that humans have trouble hearing sounds above 16-KHz.

This is why lossy codecs will discard all audio information above the 16-KHz threshold when they're configured to output the smallest possible files [lowest bit-rates].

Most of the time, lossy encoders makes good decisions regarding which bits of audio information to keep and which bits to discard. But not always. Certain types of music are more difficult to encode than others. [Music that contains a lot of "transients" is particularly difficult to encode.]

Music that is more difficult to encode has a greater chance of 'tricking' the encoder into making poor decisions about which bits keep/discard. This is especially true with lower bit-rate files [<128-kbps], where each bit is crucial to preserving the quality of the music.

___________________________________
As Freddie said..."I WANT IT ALL"

Last note:
Imagine yourself in the future for a minute.

You've got your mp3(which was lossy to start with) ,and you've put it on your CD to play as normal.
...a year later you decide to share ,so you rip it into Mp3 again - losing more from what was already lost to start with.
And the cycle continues.
In 10 years time YOU will be complaining that the quality isnt good on that show.

..This is why you need to learn about lossless

Same with video
___________________________________


[/QUOTE]

Education post of the year. Thank you for this info 928! You should have made this a New Announce.
This was worth reading. Very Interesting.
"If we look half as good to you as you do to me, we must look good" Brian May "No, Innuendo is not an Italian suppository, it's a Queen album."
Could anybody make a torrent of these files please i cant download from Rapidshare
Thank you very much for sharing this, appreciated.
"....you don't get that on X-Factor do you"
Is this audience or soundboard recording?
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]aneurysm wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Is this audience or soundboard recording?[/QUOTE]

Audience.
Thanks!
Thanks for sharing!

Take care
just heard it... ahhh!!!

it has a few cuts and WWRY is incomplete, but hey!!! what an amazing recording, I love it!!!

Thank you so much, Tatterdemalion!!!
"the things we have to do for money..."