| juquel 21.08.2004 11:33 |
I love that everyone here is sharing their Queen shows. This is such an awesome group, but being on dial-up I am missing out on all this stuff. Would some awesome Queen fans mind sharing all these great shows on a Yahoo group? Specifically, I am talking about QueenBoots, which is a small trading group right now, but would be an excellent place to get the music out there in trees, vines & weeds. Here is the URL for QueenBoots: link Cheers & thanks for sharing the music! :) |
| agneepath! 11994 21.08.2004 14:20 |
I do sympathise with those without broadband... which is why months ago I discussed the idea of "adopting a queenzoner" as another way of sharing the music. link unfortunately not too many people were interested.... |
| agneepath! 11994 21.08.2004 15:57 |
you know HeMaToSe_SuInA, at times you do sound dangerously sensible... My adoption scheme was designed for a more long term basis. It relies on the generousity of the Adopter (who only has to give up time copying the CD-Rs) and the adoptee must ensure that they send enough to cover for postage and Cd-R costs (or they could simply send a batch of stamps and CD-Rs) This is not only a one way thing. My adoptee sent me a copy of Rainbow '74 on DVD - which i did not have! Queenzoners should consider it a way of sharing the music! Not everyone has new bootlegs they can upload. This could be a way of helping other fans, in the same spirit of generousity that Richard, Whiteman, Mystery Man, Rien and many others have already demonstrated. |
| agneepath! 11994 21.08.2004 16:42 |
"The only think I can do is receive the bootlegs, convert all the songs to mp3, put in a zip file and let it available on the internet..." Whitemanadmin and others have forbidden us from converting to mp3s! So probably not a good idea... The adoption scheme would work providing enough people volunteer to be the adopters. This is where it pays to be nice to other Queenzoners on the board... |
| Maz 21.08.2004 22:03 |
Agneepath! wrote: My adoption scheme was designed for a more long term basis. It relies on the generousity of the Adopter (who only has to give up time copying the CD-Rs) and the adoptee must ensure that they send enough to cover for postage and Cd-R costs (or they could simply send a batch of stamps and CD-Rs) Queenzoners should consider it a way of sharing the music! Not everyone has new bootlegs they can upload. This could be a way of helping other fans, in the same spirit of generousity that Richard, Whiteman, Mystery Man, Rien and many others have already demonstrated.I think you will find that there are many QZers who have helped others. As admirable as your plan was, Agneepath, there are other, less costly means for these users to helps others. The Hub, for instance, allows us to share with one another; the bootleg tree allowed for the same type of sharing for a minimal amount. Your idea might work better if you organized a series of B&Ps for others. This is easier for the sharer, and only a minor cost for the other person. But remember one thing - No Good Deed Goes Unpunished. |
| Maz 21.08.2004 22:06 |
HeMaToSe_SuInA wrote:Mp3 is a lossy format. By converting to Mp3, you lose data and can potentially infect the trading pool. Collectors hate getting bootlegs that are mp3-sourced.Agneepath! wrote: Whitemanadmin and others have forbidden us from converting to mp3s! So probably not a good idea...What did they do it for? |
| Maz 21.08.2004 22:06 |
Sorry - hit the wrong button. |
| juquel 22.08.2004 00:55 |
Adopting a QueenZoner is a good idea, but w/ a groups devoted to Vines, Weeds, Tress, Chains, etc. it is cheaper and more effective. I have been in several Who trade groups and other general music ones, and my trade list has grown by leaps and bounds. There is not much Queen offered on other groups though, so a Queen specific group will get the music out there. The idea is to share the music, so fans don't have to put money in a bootleggers pocket. |
| Mr Mercury 22.08.2004 11:40 |
The Life and Times of Zeni wrote:Also, like before when Richard ran the old MP3 section, the whole point is to share full quality sound to other Queen fans so that they dont have to go to bootleg traders and be charged rip off prices. Thanks to people like Richard, YV, Whiteman etc, I have saved a fortune. And thats why they do it - and I thank them wholeheartedly for it.HeMaToSe_SuInA wrote:Mp3 is a lossy format. By converting to Mp3, you lose data and can potentially infect the trading pool. Collectors hate getting bootlegs that are mp3-sourced.Agneepath! wrote: Whitemanadmin and others have forbidden us from converting to mp3s! So probably not a good idea...What did they do it for? Dave |
| Maz 22.08.2004 14:23 |
HeMaToSe_SuInA wrote: If mp3 is so "bad and dangerous", why don't you use OGG Vorbis? It's smaller than mp3 and has 30% quality. FLAC are too big! If the terrible mp3 has been used for example, at 128K/44.1Khz, each MB would have a little more than 1 minute of audio, what means that the most boots would reach 100Mb. They would have between 80 and 90Mb. So, OGG Vorbis is smaller rand has better quality. Why wouldn't use? The most new versions of players(Winamp 5, Windows Media Player 9, RealOne, etc) aready can play these files. But if you all disagree it, so why don't you put the FLAC files on a ZIP file before uploading? It would help a lot.You are missing the point. Lossless compression is what collectors want, not lossy such as Mp3 or OGG Vorbis. Flac and Shn offer lossless, and that is why it is commonly traded. The fear is that someone who has a Mp3-sourced boot will trade it, knowingly or unknowingly, to others. The down side to flac is the large file size, but even that is considerably less then Wav. HeMaToSe_SuInA wrote: Putting the files on four or five serves could help too. Some programs, like the Download Accelerator, always search for the file on different servers, so it download from the 4 serves at the "same time", "breaking" the file in lots of "pieces", so it always download the "pieces" in the faster server. When it begins to slow down, DA download the rest in other server, always in the faster one.The idea of Torrents is that one person doesn't have to shoulder the burden of sharing; torrents allow everyone to give back a little. Putting the files on a server negates this, and putting them on 4 or 5 servers would only complicate things. |
| Queenette=1 22.08.2004 22:55 |
You know! What would a QUEEN site be without being able to download and share their music and a very caring. Maybe we can all get together and do something ourselves. I am VERY down for that idea! Lets (Back) Chat! |
| Maz 22.08.2004 23:18 |
HeMaToSe_SuInA wrote: SO why can't people put the FLAC files into a ZIP file? The file would be smaller(and quickly!) to download, and after the download the people can just unzip the files and they'll be perfect as they were before being zipped!I really don't know. All I can say is that all of the torrents I have downloaded do not come zipped, so there may be a reason for it that I am not aware of. Or they may just figure that if you are going to the trouble to download a torrent over 500MB, the minimal amount of time you will save if it is zipped is just not worth it. |
| juquel 22.08.2004 23:50 |
Torrents are not zipped because that would be redundant. FLAC, SHN & APE are all compression formats for music. FLAC = Free Lossless Audio Compression. SHN = Shorten and APE is short for Monkey's Audio compression. If you zip the files after compressing them w/ FLAC, SHN or APE, it won't save much more space... |
| El Shileno 24.08.2004 14:08 |
There's a great program, called soul seek, when we -the dial up users- can share bootlegs and things like that. As a dial up user, I only have some 40 bootlegs, all in mp3 quality to share if someone is interested, or even trade for material that I don't have. I would really like to listen one of those flacs, and realise if the difference is so big as they say. Anyway, there's a lot of concerts, with poor quality, and I think the Flac can't make it sound better. It's true the compression of the mp3 it's like 1 to 10, so you lose some quality, but also there's a lot of great softwares to improve the quality of them, if you use them in the right way. |
| Pim Derks 24.08.2004 15:39 |
"there's a lot of great softwares to improve the quality of them, if you use them in the right way" fact remains that you can't improve something which isn't there. it may sound like it's better, but you're dealing with inferior quality material anyway. |