| Gregsynth 14.01.2011 00:36 |
. |
| tcc 14.01.2011 01:28 |
Thank you very much and thanks to Sir GH. |
| Gregsynth 14.01.2011 01:41 |
You're welcome! |
| PBB 14.01.2011 03:03 |
Thank you both of you. |
| vivaqueen 14.01.2011 03:38 |
MERCI BEAUCOUP |
| Fabio Tosti 14.01.2011 07:00 |
Mediafire or Megaupload, please Greg =) |
| Tim June 14.01.2011 07:51 |
Thank you very much for this special show! |
| pittrek 14.01.2011 10:12 |
Nice, thanks :-) |
| Gregsynth 14.01.2011 11:38 |
I'll upload this to megaupload/mediafire today! |
| dive2063 14.01.2011 12:12 |
much thanks! |
| Stephane15 14.01.2011 12:23 |
Thanks to all people involved |
| The Real Wizard 14.01.2011 14:40 |
(double post) |
| Gregsynth 14.01.2011 15:16 |
(double post) |
| The Real Wizard 14.01.2011 15:17 |
Thanks for the speed correction, but there are some issues here. First off, this wasn't a mono recording. Listen to one of the channels on its own and compare it to the master copy, and you'll hear that it's stereo sound. And if you changed the pitch of only one channel, then the sound is actually changing throughout the show, as one channel is getting progressively faster than the other. Your lineage is therefore misleading, as you actually changed the pitch in two different ways. The proper way to create the chorus effect is to copy one channel over to the other, and move it over a hair... this way the timeline remains constant. You altered the tracks separately, which is a major no no... this created SBEs... i.e. clicks between the tracks. You should always paste the tracks into one giant track and then separate them later. But this particular case is even worse, because by changing the pitch on only one channel, the length of each channel is now different, so one channel briefly cuts out between every song. See the attached screenshot. And when naming the tracks, you didn't have the leading zero on the first 9 tracks, so the track order is shuffled. Everyone can feel free to decide for themselves.. but if I were the moderator here I would be pulling this before more people can jump on. With all due respect, please leave remastering to those who know what they are doing. |
| Gregsynth 14.01.2011 15:20 |
All I did was copy the track over to another channel, then raised the pitch (didn't touch actual tempo), by 0.001 of a semitone. That way, it creates the "stereo" effect. Whenever I fix the pitch and tempo on recordings, I do them separate (to be as accurate as possible). I did try using the "chorus" method, but that causing some bad distortion, and an "artificial" sound to go through the sound (even with an EQ attempt). Moving the timeline in Audacity was actually throwing the tempo and sync OFF. As for the SBEs, I dunno, maybe I did inadvertently caused those. In that case, I'll take responsibility for that-sorry. BTW, I do know how to remaster (well on a basic level), I was probably having an off day and coupled with the excitement of this concert, I overlooked some stuff. Thanks for the comment, though. |
| The Real Wizard 14.01.2011 15:27 |
That is not the proper way to create the "stereo" effect. Stereo is when the two channels are actually different. What you've done is removed one perfectly good channel, duplicated the other, and changed the speed of one of them. Therefore at any given snapshot of time, the timeline of the two channels is not identical to any other. The fluctuation isn't audible, but this is why there are gaps between the tracks in one channel. >I did try using the "chorus" method, but that causing some bad distortion, and an "artificial" sound to go through the sound (even with an EQ attempt). You have to time it right. It can be done, but not with old concert recordings that are already in stereo to begin with. >BTW, I do know how to remaster (well on a basic level) Until you're a professional (or something close to it), you probably shouldn't share your work with hundreds of people. Aaron Sorkin once said.. "I am all for everyone having a voice. I just don't think everyone has earned the microphone. And that's what the internet has done." I guess this applies to audio as well. Thanks for your efforts Greg, but please, leave this stuff to people who know how to do it more professionally. |
| Gregsynth 14.01.2011 15:33 |
Well, I was trying to say that wanted to get the sound "spread" across the headphones/speakers. Could I at least stick the pitch correction stuff that I used to do (and that's the only thing I did)? I can't fuck that up! |
| The Real Wizard 14.01.2011 15:37 |
Of course Greg... you're welcome to do whatever you want. We're all learning here. We just need to exercise discretion and think first if something is worth publishing for the world to hear or not. If the recording is analog-sourced and the speed is wrong, it's both speed and pitch that are off, as this is what happens when tapes run too slow or too fast. We can manipulate one or the other or both, but in these cases it should always be both that are corrected. |
| Gregsynth 14.01.2011 15:40 |
Thanks. Give me a concert that needs pitch correction. I want to prove myself. |
| The Real Wizard 14.01.2011 15:44 |
Can't think of anything off hand. Pretty much everything has already been done. But if you do this in the future, be sure to paste all the tracks into one giant track and use a program like GoldWave to insert queue points and divide the tracks cleanly. |
| aristide1 14.01.2011 16:23 |
"Nobody told you to download it." sirGH This was your reply, last time when I was critical about a so called "remaster". Isn't applicable to you ? |
| The Real Wizard 14.01.2011 18:04 |
How nice of you to pop in, creating nothing but trouble as usual. The difference is... you've never had any constructive criticisms You just complained, and have never offered anything of value. When I go through the trouble of dealing with the taper and getting the recording out there, I think I am entitled to voice criticism when someone changes the recording for the worse. But of course you'd know about these things since you're so involved in this community, right? What exactly have you contributed again.. ? |
| Gregsynth 14.01.2011 20:43 |
aristide1 wrote: "Nobody told you to download it." sirGH This was your reply, last time when I was critical about a so called "remaster". Isn't applicable to you ? ==== (double post) |
| The Real Wizard 14.01.2011 21:03 |
Let's not make this too easy for him, Greg. I'd prefer to watch him squirm.. |
| Gregsynth 14.01.2011 21:15 |
Sir GH wrote: Let's not make this too easy for him, Greg. I'd prefer to watch him squirm.. ======= Haha. Does he have a grudge or something against you? |
| The Real Wizard 14.01.2011 21:55 |
Nah, I'm sure it's nothing personal. Besides, plenty of people call this troll out on this stuff regularly.. |
| Gregsynth 14.01.2011 22:06 |
This sounds amusing! |
| on my way up 15.01.2011 04:41 |
I'm not very fond of about 90% of the remasters to be honest. I really feel there wasn't any need to remaster this one. The original sounded like a great transfer and didn't need work on it imo. Please note that MANY tapers prefer NO "remastering" of their tapes and mostly - as pointed out - rightly so. There are of course always exceptions; For example: the wonderful Boston "76 recording needed speed correction and was wonderfully done by a dime member. Also, those tarantura releases - great as they are - could be improved I think. About this concert, it's great but imo certainly not one of FM's best... |
| Gregsynth 15.01.2011 04:47 |
Do you want me to delete this torrent? |
| TimBHM 15.01.2011 11:26 |
I've only just started downloading this now so I can't comment but if it's suffering from as many problems as Sir GH says then why not have a go at re-doing it the way he suggests? |
| Gregsynth 15.01.2011 11:53 |
I agree. I want to redo this. I want to just get the pitch corrected! |
| The Real Wizard 15.01.2011 13:03 |
on my way up wrote: "Also, those tarantura releases - great as they are - could be improved I think." ===================== A little birdie told me that someone is working on these shows... stay tuned ! As for this show, I think it's just fine as it was. The tape runs a very slight tad too slow, but nothing to get excited about. As far as I'm concerned, until people know how to conquer SBEs they shouldn't be posting remasters for people to download. I've said my piece... but I can't control what people do. You guys can do whatever you want. Good luck, and have fun. |
| Gregsynth 15.01.2011 13:06 |
OK. |
| kohuept 15.01.2011 17:27 |
-delete- |
| Farrokh The Great 15.01.2011 22:21 |
on my way up wrote: I'm not very fond of about 90% of the remasters to be honest. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I agree with You on my way up, no offense to anyone but to equalize a track generally isn’t a good idea because each one have his own preferences over the range of audio frequencies, so what is good for someone isn't necessarily good for someone else, so generally it’s better to maintain intact the track (without equalization), and once been equalized, the track, cannot be recovered the original level of db lost at certain points, by other side to use the hiss reduction option in most cases worsens the audio content due to the use of “filters” that also “stole” the high frequencies of the audio. |
| Gregsynth 16.01.2011 00:18 |
Don't download this version. I uploaded the same concert via torrent--but without modifications. That is the version to download. |