928...
This is from a silver, on the Wardour label, so nobody here is to blame.
Is the video at least lossless?
The Real Wizard
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Arnaldo "Ogre-" Silveira
Thank you very much, YV, you rock! :D
Cheers,
Ogre-
Cheers,
Ogre-
pittrek
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]928...
This is from a silver, on the Wardour label, so nobody here is to blame.
Is the video at least lossless?
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, how can a video on a DVD be lossless ? It's an MPEG2, so you ALWAYS loose a LOT, if it's interlaced you loose 50% of the video !
This is from a silver, on the Wardour label, so nobody here is to blame.
Is the video at least lossless?
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, how can a video on a DVD be lossless ? It's an MPEG2, so you ALWAYS loose a LOT, if it's interlaced you loose 50% of the video !
928
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME]928...
This is from a silver, on the Wardour label, so nobody here is to blame.
Is the video at least lossless?
[/QUOTE]
Its not from the master recording Bob that's for sure,but it doesnt help that it's the screen being filmed.That tekky wasnt too clever back then was it!
Mpeg2 is indeed a lossy format Pittrek(i think Bob meant is it master recording)
:Personal Opinion:
Its from a 2nd/3rd Gen copy that has also been reencoded when synced to the new audio(but that may be generation loss).
That new audio has been screwed to AC3 AT 192kps.It has a few minor faults and is badly edited in a place or 2 during playback of the movie.
I give the video 6.5 and the audio 7 as it's compressed to a level lower than a good quality Mp3.
Menu gives an option of audio 1 or 2 not saying which is which..(Babs does a better menu).
:Overal....as a production:
The lossless audio CDs will make the bootleg set collectable.
BUT
I would wait for the repack on the video.It will come from somewhere ;)
This is from a silver, on the Wardour label, so nobody here is to blame.
Is the video at least lossless?
[/QUOTE]
Its not from the master recording Bob that's for sure,but it doesnt help that it's the screen being filmed.That tekky wasnt too clever back then was it!
Mpeg2 is indeed a lossy format Pittrek(i think Bob meant is it master recording)
:Personal Opinion:
Its from a 2nd/3rd Gen copy that has also been reencoded when synced to the new audio(but that may be generation loss).
That new audio has been screwed to AC3 AT 192kps.It has a few minor faults and is badly edited in a place or 2 during playback of the movie.
I give the video 6.5 and the audio 7 as it's compressed to a level lower than a good quality Mp3.
Menu gives an option of audio 1 or 2 not saying which is which..(Babs does a better menu).
:Overal....as a production:
The lossless audio CDs will make the bootleg set collectable.
BUT
I would wait for the repack on the video.It will come from somewhere ;)
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]pittrek wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Sorry, how can a video on a DVD be lossless ?[/QUOTE]
Easily... it can be encoded from a vcd.
Or... on a standard single-sided DVD-R, anything that runs over 60 minutes is lossy. 4.7 Gb in lossless quality is to be no more than an hour of footage. It all depends on how you encode it.
[QUOTE]It's an MPEG2, so you ALWAYS loose a LOT, if it's interlaced you loose 50% of the video ![/QUOTE]
Right... so don't encode it interlaced then.. :P
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]928 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Mpeg2 is indeed a lossy format Pittrek(i think Bob meant is it master recording)[/QUOTE]
I thought the best way to encode a DVD was in Mpeg-2. So are you saying that every DVD-R encoded from a VHS is lossy, even if it's 60 minutes and 4.7 Gb?
Easily... it can be encoded from a vcd.
Or... on a standard single-sided DVD-R, anything that runs over 60 minutes is lossy. 4.7 Gb in lossless quality is to be no more than an hour of footage. It all depends on how you encode it.
[QUOTE]It's an MPEG2, so you ALWAYS loose a LOT, if it's interlaced you loose 50% of the video ![/QUOTE]
Right... so don't encode it interlaced then.. :P
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]928 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Mpeg2 is indeed a lossy format Pittrek(i think Bob meant is it master recording)[/QUOTE]
I thought the best way to encode a DVD was in Mpeg-2. So are you saying that every DVD-R encoded from a VHS is lossy, even if it's 60 minutes and 4.7 Gb?
Bobby_brown
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]928 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
would wait for the repack on the video.It will come from somewhere ;)
[/QUOTE]
Try and put a DL with 7 GB on Queenzone to see what happens ; )
Take care
would wait for the repack on the video.It will come from somewhere ;)
[/QUOTE]
Try and put a DL with 7 GB on Queenzone to see what happens ; )
Take care
928
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Sir GH<br><h6>ah yeah</h6> wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]pittrek wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Sorry, how can a video on a DVD be lossless ?[/QUOTE]
Easily... it can be encoded from a vcd.
Or... on a standard single-sided DVD-R, anything that runs over 60 minutes is lossy. 4.7 Gb in lossless quality is to be no more than an hour of footage. It all depends on how you encode it.
[QUOTE]It's an MPEG2, so you ALWAYS loose a LOT, if it's interlaced you loose 50% of the video ![/QUOTE]
Right... so don't encode it interlaced then.. :P
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]928 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Mpeg2 is indeed a lossy format Pittrek(i think Bob meant is it master recording)[/QUOTE]
I thought the best way to encode a DVD was in Mpeg-2. So are you saying that every DVD-R encoded from a VHS is lossy, even if it's 60 minutes and 4.7 Gb?
[/QUOTE]
It is the best way Bob ,but mpeg2 is still a lossy format...its just how its transferd & encoded from the master and even more important...how it was originally recorded that matters.
To have a full 2 hour show would be 25+gb which isn't(wasn't) practical(Blue-Ray etc will change that).Higher Bit rate ,the better the quality..but certain factors come into play.
This was ,i presume from a VHS.I dont know how it was recorded (camera)or transfered to VHS.
Now VHS only had 240 lines or so in its resolution to start with so you cant afford to keep copying etc as it will lose its stats pretty quick.
You also dont want to compress the transfer or that fucks it as well...as does re-encoding with poor knowledge of video and how its made up.
Basically,you can get 4.36GB onto a 4.7Gb disc as DVD-Video ,including the audio.The rest is menu & bollocks.
So from VHS it should be transfered using S-VHS player/output which will give you the best recording of the master transfer.
Keep the bit-rate for video at the highest allowed (dont forget you have audio to add & 4.36Gb to do it in)to keep all quality of the original.That rate will probably be more than needed.
If the video & audio takes it over the size for 1 disc...use a DL Disc or 2 x 4.7s
1 hour at the highest rate IS the best because of technology ,but it's still lossy as a fact.
I have missed a hell of a lot out...but ,bit at a time and you'll remember more.
:Side note for readers:
It doesnt mean that its ok to convert a VCD to DVD....it will still be a VCD that is now in a DVD bit rate ,not a DVD.You wont get back what was never there from the master transfer or how it was transfered and each copy/compression/re-encode says bye bye to History & Quality.
Thats why its important QZ people......you decintegrate History when you screw the source.You don't get it back you know.
Keep it how you got it and then look for better.You will find it.
Easily... it can be encoded from a vcd.
Or... on a standard single-sided DVD-R, anything that runs over 60 minutes is lossy. 4.7 Gb in lossless quality is to be no more than an hour of footage. It all depends on how you encode it.
[QUOTE]It's an MPEG2, so you ALWAYS loose a LOT, if it's interlaced you loose 50% of the video ![/QUOTE]
Right... so don't encode it interlaced then.. :P
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]928 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Mpeg2 is indeed a lossy format Pittrek(i think Bob meant is it master recording)[/QUOTE]
I thought the best way to encode a DVD was in Mpeg-2. So are you saying that every DVD-R encoded from a VHS is lossy, even if it's 60 minutes and 4.7 Gb?
[/QUOTE]
It is the best way Bob ,but mpeg2 is still a lossy format...its just how its transferd & encoded from the master and even more important...how it was originally recorded that matters.
To have a full 2 hour show would be 25+gb which isn't(wasn't) practical(Blue-Ray etc will change that).Higher Bit rate ,the better the quality..but certain factors come into play.
This was ,i presume from a VHS.I dont know how it was recorded (camera)or transfered to VHS.
Now VHS only had 240 lines or so in its resolution to start with so you cant afford to keep copying etc as it will lose its stats pretty quick.
You also dont want to compress the transfer or that fucks it as well...as does re-encoding with poor knowledge of video and how its made up.
Basically,you can get 4.36GB onto a 4.7Gb disc as DVD-Video ,including the audio.The rest is menu & bollocks.
So from VHS it should be transfered using S-VHS player/output which will give you the best recording of the master transfer.
Keep the bit-rate for video at the highest allowed (dont forget you have audio to add & 4.36Gb to do it in)to keep all quality of the original.That rate will probably be more than needed.
If the video & audio takes it over the size for 1 disc...use a DL Disc or 2 x 4.7s
1 hour at the highest rate IS the best because of technology ,but it's still lossy as a fact.
I have missed a hell of a lot out...but ,bit at a time and you'll remember more.
:Side note for readers:
It doesnt mean that its ok to convert a VCD to DVD....it will still be a VCD that is now in a DVD bit rate ,not a DVD.You wont get back what was never there from the master transfer or how it was transfered and each copy/compression/re-encode says bye bye to History & Quality.
Thats why its important QZ people......you decintegrate History when you screw the source.You don't get it back you know.
Keep it how you got it and then look for better.You will find it.
Cygnus X-1
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]928 wrote: [/QUOTENAME] Thats why its important QZ people......you decintegrate History when you screw the source.You don't get it back you know.
[/QUOTE]
Well said. I hope someday all those Mp3 lovers will learn that..
[/QUOTE]
Well said. I hope someday all those Mp3 lovers will learn that..
The Real Wizard
Great post 928... learned a lot!
YourValentine
"Its not from the master recording Bob that's for sure,but it doesnt help that it's the screen being filmed.That tekky wasnt too clever back then was it!"
Not too clever? For me he is a hero :-) He stood in the midst of 120 000 people and filmed the complete concert off the screen while nobody at QP had the brain to record the feed to a tape. Today the screens are better and you don't get these bad pictures but we would not have Knebworth if not for this wonderful fan who made the effort. I wish I knew who he was.
Not too clever? For me he is a hero :-) He stood in the midst of 120 000 people and filmed the complete concert off the screen while nobody at QP had the brain to record the feed to a tape. Today the screens are better and you don't get these bad pictures but we would not have Knebworth if not for this wonderful fan who made the effort. I wish I knew who he was.
Zork
Thank you so much for seeding the dvd edition!!
I can't see currently any seeders/ downloaders (yesterday evening they was..) - are they?
I can't see currently any seeders/ downloaders (yesterday evening they was..) - are they?
928
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"Its not from the master recording Bob that's for sure,but it doesnt help that it's the screen being filmed.That tekky wasnt too clever back then was it!"
Not too clever? For me he is a hero :-) He stood in the midst of 120 000 people and filmed the complete concert off the screen while nobody at QP had the brain to record the feed to a tape. Today the screens are better and you don't get these bad pictures but we would not have Knebworth if not for this wonderful fan who made the effort. I wish I knew who he was.
[/QUOTE]
I would as well Babs.
Then we would have the master and could show Wardour how it's meant to be done.
The taper did the right thing from where he was positioned.It's just technology(tekky) that let the recording down.
I was at Live Aid the year before and remember the screens.Broke a size record they did.
Buggered if you could work out who it was on stage 1/2 the time looking at them.
Not too clever? For me he is a hero :-) He stood in the midst of 120 000 people and filmed the complete concert off the screen while nobody at QP had the brain to record the feed to a tape. Today the screens are better and you don't get these bad pictures but we would not have Knebworth if not for this wonderful fan who made the effort. I wish I knew who he was.
[/QUOTE]
I would as well Babs.
Then we would have the master and could show Wardour how it's meant to be done.
The taper did the right thing from where he was positioned.It's just technology(tekky) that let the recording down.
I was at Live Aid the year before and remember the screens.Broke a size record they did.
Buggered if you could work out who it was on stage 1/2 the time looking at them.
Madman
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME]"Its not from the master recording Bob that's for sure,but it doesnt help that it's the screen being filmed.That tekky wasnt too clever back then was it!"
Not too clever? For me he is a hero :-) He stood in the midst of 120 000 people and filmed the complete concert off the screen while nobody at QP had the brain to record the feed to a tape. Today the screens are better and you don't get these bad pictures but we would not have Knebworth if not for this wonderful fan who made the effort. I wish I knew who he was.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, for me too YV. This guy had a great idea to film this 'outdoor screen'. Only big shame that in this time this large screens don't had enough good resolutions so we see those pixels. But overall, somethinks better then nothink, right :) I remember old copys from years ago with realy shity quality (b/w or yellow green fruit jelly)
Compared to other amateur videos from Magic Tour this one from low generation tape is realy good. From Paris is also nice but this shaky camera and lack of original sound in the first 20min, wrrr... Newcastle and Manchester - recorded to far but that new copys on DVD are quite good.
And Dublin - damn, why it's a edit from 2 cameras and so stupid recorded - one cam from far another one close to stage but they filmed mostly hands and hads. And the rest of that material probably lost, right ? Vienna is also fine but picture is to much dark but zooms are fine. Knebworth is complete and I watched this more times then above stuff.
PS
I personally hope that are some people have hidden in his houses other videos from that tour.
Not too clever? For me he is a hero :-) He stood in the midst of 120 000 people and filmed the complete concert off the screen while nobody at QP had the brain to record the feed to a tape. Today the screens are better and you don't get these bad pictures but we would not have Knebworth if not for this wonderful fan who made the effort. I wish I knew who he was.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, for me too YV. This guy had a great idea to film this 'outdoor screen'. Only big shame that in this time this large screens don't had enough good resolutions so we see those pixels. But overall, somethinks better then nothink, right :) I remember old copys from years ago with realy shity quality (b/w or yellow green fruit jelly)
Compared to other amateur videos from Magic Tour this one from low generation tape is realy good. From Paris is also nice but this shaky camera and lack of original sound in the first 20min, wrrr... Newcastle and Manchester - recorded to far but that new copys on DVD are quite good.
And Dublin - damn, why it's a edit from 2 cameras and so stupid recorded - one cam from far another one close to stage but they filmed mostly hands and hads. And the rest of that material probably lost, right ? Vienna is also fine but picture is to much dark but zooms are fine. Knebworth is complete and I watched this more times then above stuff.
PS
I personally hope that are some people have hidden in his houses other videos from that tour.
riku_queencdr
I guess Wardour had to make a compromise with the sound. If they could do only 1DVD release (all their CD+DVD releases are 2CD+1DVD), the sound was already lossless on the audio CDs. In that case they most likely rather kept the best possible quality for the video and compressed the audio more heavily.
The video quality is identical to the best possible known (previously) circulated copy. At least I don't see difference between them but maybe I'm just blind...
The video quality is identical to the best possible known (previously) circulated copy. At least I don't see difference between them but maybe I'm just blind...
Madman
Right, some months ago I got another copy on dvd and there is no difference in quality.
My previous one is on PAL format but for sure the same generation tape.
I sometimes reduce sharpness on tv to minimalize pixels of that big screen and looks bit better.
My previous one is on PAL format but for sure the same generation tape.
I sometimes reduce sharpness on tv to minimalize pixels of that big screen and looks bit better.