| tgunn2760 05.04.2009 23:26 |
Queen The Summit, Houston, TX 12.11.1977 PAL DVD PRO SHOT LPCM MONO AUDIO @ 768 KBPS (Audio is decompressed from AC3) Fully Authored Artwork 118 mns Setlist: We Will Rock You (fast)= Killer Queen= You're My Best Friend= Good Old Fashioned Boy Lover= Liar =Brighton Rock= I'm In Love With My Car= Love of my Life= Somebody To Love= Get Down Make Love ='39 =Death on Two Legs =The Millionaire Waltz= My Melancholy Blues= White Man= Bohemian Rhapsody= Sheer Heart Attack =The Prophet's Song =Keep Yourself Alive =Jailhouse Rock= Guitar =Solo= Tie Your Mother Down= God Save The Queen Now I'm Here =We Will Rock You= Stone Cold Crazy= We are the Champions =============================================== This is the DVD that was shared at Queenzone by I believe Pow-Wow. The original audio, AC3 @ 192 I believe, was decompressed, and one channel was deleted. What is left then is a mono wav file, @ 768 I added chapters and song selection menus using Tsunami DVD Author Pro, using the "smart rendering" setting, which means no re-encoding. Enjoy until a better version comes along. Tgunn2760 |
| tgunn2760 05.04.2009 23:30 |
My ISP is slow to dead until 2 am, after that it picks up until 6 pm the next day. I will probably disconnect for a couple of hours to reboot after 12 hours of seeding and resume again after that. Screens of the menus are on page 6 of Definitive Houston thread. |
| The Real Wizard 06.04.2009 02:36 |
You da man. Cheers. |
| Ginger01 06.04.2009 03:13 |
Great work! Thanks for this :) |
| onevsion 06.04.2009 04:14 |
That's fast. Thanks a lot to all involved in this project! |
| Luko255 06.04.2009 04:37 |
|
| brians wig 06.04.2009 05:05 |
The downside to converting the ac3 to wav is that at some point in the future, your lineage will be lost and this DVD will be posted somewhere else as a lossless audio version and everyone will be fooled into downloading it. I'd have left the ac3 as it was. I'm sure folks will be grateful for a menu though, so thanks for your work doing that. |
| deltazulu 06.04.2009 08:26 |
Thx so much... I'll jump on this when I go home for lunch. |
| Kniggit 06.04.2009 12:17 |
cheers! nice work! |
| bubs 06.04.2009 12:50 |
thank you for this cant wait to see and hear it. |
| MarkRW 06.04.2009 13:14 |
Thank you. |
| popy 06.04.2009 13:59 |
what's the point of decompressing an ac3 file and getting it to wave/lpcm? isn't it like having an mp3 and convert it to flac ? there's absolutly no point in that...or is it? correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't ac3 files lossy? |
| tgunn2760 06.04.2009 14:16 |
popy wrote: what's the point of decompressing an ac3 file and getting it to wave/lpcm? isn't it like having an mp3 and convert it to flac ? there's absolutly no point in that...or is it? correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't ac3 files lossy? The definitive version you may have downloaded probably came from a version I made with decompressed audio, but there the wav file had its volume doubled in Goldwave which caused some distortion. This decompressed AC3 audio was not altered, and according to SirGH is perfect. |
| Marknow 06.04.2009 15:25 |
Thanks for this. The ac3 question drove me nuts a few months back. |
| TimBHM 06.04.2009 17:44 |
popy wrote: what's the point of decompressing an ac3 file and getting it to wave/lpcm? isn't it like having an mp3 and convert it to flac ? there's absolutly no point in that...or is it? correct me if i'm wrong, but isn't ac3 files lossy? I was wondering the same thing. Decompressing the AC3 stream to WAV offers no advantage over the original AC3 stream - it cannot magically restore the data that was lost when it was converted to AC3 in the first place. In fact you end up with a significantly larger file so why bother? Sorry if I'm having a senior moment but I can't see the point of the conversion? |
| victor fleitas 06.04.2009 20:43 |
So... This is the best version avaliable till now? I mean, Both Audio And Video? the best source for the audio? |
| RoyThomasBaker 06.04.2009 20:50 |
Thanks a lot! |
| deltazulu 06.04.2009 22:06 |
victor fleitas wrote: So... This is the best version avaliable till now? I mean, Both Audio And Video? the best source for the audio? yes |
| eYe 07.04.2009 00:30 |
Thank You ! [img=/images/smiley/msn/thumbs_up.gif][/img] |
| gaspar 07.04.2009 08:57 |
I say thank you so much! |
| The Real Wizard 07.04.2009 09:12 |
TimBHM wrote: it cannot magically restore the data that was lost when it was converted to AC3 in the first place. 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 07.04.2009 09:58 |
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 ;) |
| Dodger Taylor 07.04.2009 10:11 |
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 07.04.2009 10:12 |
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 07.04.2009 10:19 |
This recording is mono so you don't lose anything by removing one channel. |
| TimBHM 07.04.2009 10:33 |
daffy_the_duck wrote: 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? 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 07.04.2009 10:33 |
little foetus wrote: This recording is mono so you don't lose anything by removing one channel. 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 07.04.2009 10:35 |
Sir GH wrote: 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. 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 07.04.2009 10:58 |
Sir GH wrote:TimBHM wrote: it cannot magically restore the data that was lost when it was converted to AC3 in the first place.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. 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 07.04.2009 11:02 |
tgunn2760 wrote:little foetus wrote: This recording is mono so you don't lose anything by removing one channel.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- It's normal. A properly encoded ac3 file is always more silent then the wav file |
| daffy_the_duck 07.04.2009 11:26 |
thanks for all your answers guys! |
| The Real Wizard 07.04.2009 12:02 |
TimBHM wrote: 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 VHS came like that. It's ever so odd... each of the two channels, when played separately, sounded identical. But when played together, it was like a cat fight. Removing one channel was a shot in the dark, and it worked. |
| TimBHM 07.04.2009 13:04 |
Sir GH wrote:TimBHM wrote: 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 VHS came like that. It's ever so odd... each of the two channels, when played separately, sounded identical. But when played together, it was like a cat fight. Removing one channel was a shot in the dark, and it worked. Then putting my physicist's hat on... sounds like there was a minor phase variance between the two channels - that would make them clash horribly together but in a repeated pattern. |
| popy 07.04.2009 13:39 |
TimBHM wrote:Sir GH wrote: 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.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...! AC3 doesn't mean 5.1. i have a concert on my pc that is AC3 2 channel stereo. i think that this is what they call Dolby Surround, that can take up to 4.1 channels, being the rear channels in mono. Dolby Digital is the 5.1 track |
| YourValentine 07.04.2009 14:08 |
Thanks for the effort and the share :) |
| The Real Wizard 07.04.2009 14:18 |
TimBHM wrote: Then putting my physicist's hat on... sounds like there was a minor phase variance between the two channels - that would make them clash horribly together but in a repeated pattern. Ah yes, phase... there's the lingo I was looking for! But I still maintain that cat fight sounds funnier... |
| Yara 07.04.2009 14:27 |
YourValentine wrote: Thanks for the effort and the share :) I second that. :)) By the way, I tried to annoy you with a PM but it didn't work. lol |
| deleted user 07.04.2009 14:51 |
Thanks for your time and effort. |
| on my way up 07.04.2009 15:36 |
This is a fantastic upload! I'm watching it right now and the sound is indeed much much better :-) A huge thanks to the people who made this happen. The fact they could be even better than this shows what an amazing live band they were! |
| Yara 07.04.2009 16:02 |
on my way up wrote: This is a fantastic upload! I'm watching it right now and the sound is indeed much much better :-) A huge thanks to the people who made this happen. The fact they could be even better than this shows what an amazing live band they were! Yeah...I love this tour, I love this album, in fact (NOTW). And this concert is just awesome, so full of energy and excitement, the songs sound so fresh and the performance is great, it has those little cracks in it that makes it even more special for showing how a live performance was like, what kind of silly, minor risks, if we look at it now, they took it at the time to pull it off - it was daring, a lot of it. Freddie has some problem dealing with his nerves on Liar, as well as Brian, it's a hard song to perform live, but one can't avoid wondering at how smooth and great the quality of the performance was given the conditions - a tour supporting a new, very different album, a lot of commercial success attended by heaps of criticism by reviewers, it's like being a target during the whole gig. This is a quite moving side of music, it's been lost, unfortunately or fortunately, I don't know, but it's great. The frailty of a human being being exposed to all kinds of reactions on a stage, and the will to overcome the odds and just stifle in one's own mind the most vicious criticisms. Great concert, great band...I hope more and more people get to appreciate it. |
| deltazulu 07.04.2009 20:39 |
I remember that not that long ago the best available version of this show had horrible lines running through it. you've come a long way. cheers. |
| tgunn2760 08.04.2009 00:51 |
deltazulu wrote: I remember that not that long ago the best available version of this show had horrible lines running through it. you've come a long way. cheers. I think there are four versions circulating. The one above is NTSC, with the tracking lines, there is Pittrek's version with lossless LPCM, this version and finally the Japanese Silver Disc or Definitive Houston which we suspect is sourced from this version as well. |
| deleted user 08.04.2009 06:35 |
I have four versions of this now, one I traded for states Lpcm in the menu but is actually 2 channel ac3. It sounds the same as this version to my ears. I notice when I demux this version the wav plays at double speed! Anyone know why that is? |
| Rick 08.04.2009 10:27 |
Thanks for sharing! Although I don't hear any difference(s), I'm happy to (finally) have the definite version. |
| prairiepink 08.04.2009 16:29 |
thanks a lot! |
| tgunn2760 08.04.2009 17:01 |
Rick wrote: Thanks for sharing! Although I don't hear any difference(s), I'm happy to (finally) have the definite version. SirGH says there is distortion in the audio if you listen with headphones. The last one had the audio re-encoded anyway, (accidentally) so this is a better version, and the menus are a little better as well. |
| TimBHM 08.04.2009 17:42 |
tgunn2760 wrote:Rick wrote: Thanks for sharing! Although I don't hear any difference(s), I'm happy to (finally) have the definite version.SirGH says there is distortion in the audio if you listen with headphones. The last one had the audio re-encoded anyway, (accidentally) so this is a better version, and the menus are a little better as well. Well all I can say is wow! This is a vast improvement over the version I already had of this. Thanks for putting this together! |
| Yara 09.04.2009 02:34 |
TimBHM wrote:tgunn2760 wrote:Well all I can say is wow! This is a vast improvement over the version I already had of this. Thanks for putting this together!Rick wrote: Thanks for sharing! Although I don't hear any difference(s), I'm happy to (finally) have the definite version.SirGH says there is distortion in the audio if you listen with headphones. The last one had the audio re-encoded anyway, (accidentally) so this is a better version, and the menus are a little better as well. No! Don't tempt me and don't make me wanna download it. First and foremost because, if I dare starting such a download here, my colleagues will have me beheaded before I can smile and say to myself: "Wow, it's already past 20%...". : -/ Just say it's a disaster and insert an evil sarcastic emoticon in the right end of the page and reversed, so that people will need a mirror to decode it. A mirror is the last item I'd think about bringing along. Put your physicist's hat, yes, plus a lab mask and a blindfold. :) Well, thank you all guys, as always: Pittrek, tgunn2760 - make your name more simple, please lol - and Sir GH. Thanks! |
| vivaqueen 11.04.2009 07:33 |
MERCI BEAUCOUP |
| Wilki Amieva 12.04.2009 09:54 |
I fail to understand how AC3 -> PCM is an improvement. To me, it is just like MP3 -> FLAC. The audio will remain with the same quality as in the original AC3 stream, with the risk of the video losing bandwidth and/or recompressing it. |
| TimBHM 12.04.2009 10:05 |
Wilki Amieva wrote: I fail to understand how AC3 -> PCM is an improvement. To me, it is just like MP3 -> FLAC. The audio will remain with the same quality as in the original AC3 stream, with the risk of the video losing bandwidth and/or recompressing it. AC3 -> PCM is *not* an improvement but it needed to be decompressed to remove the extra channel that was causing all the problems. Once it's been decompressed you could damage it by recompressing it to AC3 so it's best to leave it as PCM. |
| Queenfan1995 19.04.2009 03:19 |
thanks |
| pkh 07.06.2009 03:52 |
Thanks to everybody who made this possible. As I came up to this quite late, I'm in need of a few seeders who might help me out or is there any other source from which I can download? Any help is much appreciated! Again thanks to all Queenzoners! |
| eYe 19.03.2013 04:31 |
Due to this request link I'm seeding this again. It is an upgrade of the requested version, and afaik still the best version around. |
| jabbo5150 19.03.2013 13:26 |
Thanks for this and I will seed too once it is finished for those who might still need this. I thought this version originally came from Your Valentine? The one with the great picture, but the bad audio channel? Or is that yet another version? |
| DepeX 22.09.2013 13:37 |
Can anybody seed or upload on 1fichier.com ???? Thanks... |
| jabbo5150 22.09.2013 14:13 |
Pretty sure I am seeding now. I have a few versions of this show, but I think I am seeding the right one! |
| lemonysnick123 23.09.2013 01:54 |
jabbo5150 wrote: Pretty sure I am seeding now. I have a few versions of this show, but I think I am seeding the right one!I was also trying to download but i don't have a connection to any seeders |
| eYe 23.09.2013 11:14 |
Try again. |
| DepeX 23.09.2013 11:22 |
I tried again and now i'm downloading at 75 Kb/s... Thanks a lot!! |
| lemonysnick123 25.09.2013 02:39 |
Thank you! Please continue seeding :D |
| DepeX 25.09.2013 07:39 |
Done |
| jabbo5150 26.09.2013 15:42 |
Glad you were able to get it! |
| dive2063 26.02.2015 17:10 |
seed please! thanks in advance |