DMB 11/17/1992 FIXED up for Bit Torrent download

[JWolf]

DMB 11/17/1992 FIXED is now up for Bit Torrent download at
http://beatles.serveftp.com:1412/

Dave Matthews Band
11.17.92
Trax
Charlottesville, VA

Source: SBD > Anlg (Unknown Gen.) > CD
Conversion: Optimus SCT-86 > AudioSrouce EQ 100 > Pioneer PDR-555RW
[Eric Naylor]
SHN: Chris Manichanh [chris_83_01@yahoo.com] EAC v0.9pb7 > MKW

Note: Fixed speed and pitch (04/22/2003 JWolf - jwolfpash@yahoo.com)

**DO NOT COMPRESS THIS SHOW INTO MP3 FORMAT**

track name time (m:s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
d1t01 [Set 1]Granny * 04:05
d1t02 Cry Freedom ** 04:39
d1t03 Recently * 04:00
d1t04 Pay for What You Get *** 04:34
d1t05 Halloween 07:21
d1t06 Typical Situation 09:15
d1t07 Jimi Thing 11:27
d1t08 The Song That Jane Likes 03:27
d1t09 Lie in Our Graves 04:43
d1t10 Help Myself 05:24
total 58:55

d2t01 Satellite 05.48
d2t02 Tripping Billies 04:27
d2t03 Lover Lay Down 08:47
d2t04 One Sweet World 05:03
d2t05 [Set 2] Granny * 03:31
d2t06 I'll Back You Up * 04:58
d2t07 Warehouse 08:28
d2t08 Angel from Montgomery 05:50
d2t09 True Reflections # 05:43
total 52:53

d3t01 Me & Julio down by the Schoolyard 05:55
d3t02 Two Step 12:04
d3t03 Minarets > 06:22
d3t04 Blue Water 10:51
d3t05 E: So Much to Say 06:55
d3t06 E: Ants Marching 05:16
total 47:23
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes:
* Dave Matthews solo
** Dave Matthews and Peter Griesar
*** Dave Matthews and Carter Beauford
# the end of this song is cut off

This conversion was done as a request. It is a fairly rare show with no know
digital copies in existance, which is why I put the work into converting it.
The sound isn't fantastic, but the hiss is definitely tolerable.

To put this onto two 80 minute CDs, put tracks 1-3 from D2 onto the end of D1
and but D3 after D2 T4-9. But note, that D2 will be a little over 80 minutes
so
you will need to over burn to get D2 to fit.

Compiled by Eric Naylor
dmbtrade@hotmail.com
3/14/00

[Donald V]

i think you meant 1992 not 2002...

Donald :)

[JWolf]

Yeah, I did mean 1992 and not 2002. It is fixed. Thanks!

Jon

[TwoSteppin087]

thanks alot guys, it looks like an awesome show, im getting it now!

[kindintentions]

Just grabbed it. Me and Julio Sounds Great. I will leave my window up at least all night if not all weekend. Glad to see this getting spread.


:D

[buzzy]

Taking into account the obvious issues around not wanting to post people's experiments - if there's consensus that the other version needs to be speed-corrected, and this one is done well - any thought of putting this on the http server?

[rhuss]

jwolf - just wondering what you actually did to the recording, maybe mention that in the info file.

and did you get this from the http server and fix it?

thanks.

-bob-

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
jwolf - just wondering what you actually did to the recording, maybe mention that in the info file.

and did you get this from the http server and fix it?

thanks.

-bob-

I thing I downloaded it from Usenet. Anyway, I did put in what was done to it...

Note: Fixed speed and pitch (04/22/2003 JWolf - jwolfpash@yahoo.com)

The problem with it was the speed and pictch was off like the tape deck used to playback the tape was going to fast. I have to slow this down so it would sound like the correct pitch and speed. before I seeded it, I did get a few opinions on my fixing and then I seeded.

[rhuss]

awesome. thanks jwolf.

anyone hosting this show? jwolf any way i could get a download or an upload? i can help spread it.

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
awesome. thanks jwolf.

anyone hosting this show? jwolf any way i could get a download or an upload? i can help spread it.

Do you have Usenet access? I could post it there for you.

Jon

[rhuss]

Originally posted by JWolf
Do you have Usenet access? I could post it there for you.

Jon

yes, yes i do :)

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
yes, yes i do :)

I'll post it sometime Thursday. Probably let it go post when I get to sleep so it'll finish sometime Firday. I'll be posting in alt.binaries.music.shn.dmb.

Jon

[rhuss]

excellent

[julio_havok]

Where can I download the Bit Torrent program?

[buzzy]

Originally posted by JWolf
I think I downloaded it from Usenet. Anyway, I did put in what was done to it...

Note: Fixed speed and pitch (04/22/2003 JWolf - jwolfpash@yahoo.com)

The problem with it was the speed and pictch was off like the tape deck used to playback the tape was going to fast. I have to slow this down so it would sound like the correct pitch and speed. before I seeded it, I did get a few opinions on my fixing and then I seeded. Do you know for sure you had that seed that you had the txt file for? That would be good to know.

[rhuss]

Originally posted by julio_havok
Where can I download the Bit Torrent program?

*cough* google.com *cough*

http://bitconjurer.org/BitTorrent/download.html

please also read the documentation if you don't know how to use it.

[JWolf]

Originally posted by julio_havok
Where can I download the Bit Torrent program?

BitTorrent for Windows is available at http://beatles.serveftp.com:1412. The currently best GUI client so far.

Jon

[JWolf]

Originally posted by buzzy
Do you know for sure you had that seed that you had the txt file for? That would be good to know.

Um.. No, I have no clue. I just seeded something at randome and only said I fixed it.

Of course I had the text file for it and it was all correct and I did fix it and I did seed it after I fixed it and that a silly question.

Jon

[buzzy]

Originally posted by JWolf
Um.. No, I have no clue. I just seeded something at randome and only said I fixed it.

Of course I had the text file for it and it was all correct and I did fix it and I did seed it after I fixed it and that a silly question.

Jon Jon, I've seen way more bizarre things happen with recordings. Any experienced trader or collector knows - never assume anything, always ask.

Your reply to the request about what you did to it was "fixed speed and pitch" - that isn't enough. And you seemed completely casual about the source. Left a question in my mind, dude.

[rhuss]

Originally posted by buzzy
Jon, I've seen way more bizarre things happen with recordings. Any experienced trader or collector knows - never assume anything, always ask.

i'm confused though. ask who?? if the songs match the info file i would assume its the right info file.

want me to talk to naylor again? he converted it.

[buzzy]

What I was trying to confirm was that he had the md5-matched seeds for that specific source. But you know, for what I'm interested in it for, Jon's right it's a silly question. The questions that was really getting at - whether it was another source, had been through a CDR generation, or was an unknown source (all of which are true of a lot of the stuff posted to Usenet) - aren't important if he doesn't know whether he adjusted the pitch by a semitone or a quarter octave, what sampling depth he worked in, whether he made other changes, whether he re-dithered, what tools he used, etc. I'm sure there are lots of people those things won't matter to, but the question I asked when I re-surfaced this thread has been answered as far as I'm concerned.

[rhuss]

i do agree there should be more details about what he did in the info file.

also was this seeded as flac or shn? i noticed md5's for .flac files on etree.

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
i do agree there should be more details about what he did in the info file.

also was this seeded as flac or shn? i noticed md5's for .flac files on etree.

I converted this to flac after I fixed it. I never convert a seed from the original format it was seeded with. I only will convert if it needs to be fixed like this one did. It was an original seed. No CD-R generation. What hapened was, it was off speed when recorded and I fixed it to make it sound like ti should in both speed and pitch. So it now sounds correct. I've had it on my computer for a long time and I was listening to it before I fixed it and it idn;t sound quite right so I decided to play with it and I was right. It was off.

Jon

[rhuss]

i meant is your fixed version seeded in shn or flac .... shn i hope

[Eric Naylor]

It was an original seed. No CD-R generation.
It says right in the text file that it's a CDR > EAC > SHN source. I converted this show to CD, but *I never SHNd it.* God only knows how many CD generations are in the one that is being spread here, which was SHNd by someone else along the line....

But, that being said, I listened to this show last night for the first time in a couple of years. It does seem to be a bit fast, which is how the original cassettes were. I never paid enough attention to it to realize it until now. I appreciate that somebody has taken the time to fix it, and I only hope that it was done well.

Also, that's not my exact original text file either. It was altered when it was SHNd, because I know that not all the notes on there are mine. If anyone cares.

Peace.

Eric

[JWolf]

Originally posted by Eric Naylor
It says right in the text file that it's a CDR > EAC > SHN source. I converted this show to CD, but *I never SHNd it.* God only knows how many CD generations are in the one that is being spread here, which was SHNd by someone else along the line....

But, that being said, I listened to this show last night for the first time in a couple of years. It does seem to be a bit fast, which is how the original cassettes were. I never paid enough attention to it to realize it until now. I appreciate that somebody has taken the time to fix it, and I only hope that it was done well.

Also, that's not my exact original text file either. It was altered when it was SHNd, because I know that not all the notes on there are mine. If anyone cares.

Peace.

Eric

Well, whatever the source of it, it was the only source I could find. If you want to grab a copy of this fixed version to have a listen. be happy to hook you up.

Jon

[rhuss]

did this get to the newsgroups yet?

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
did this get to the newsgroups yet?

Not yet. It'll go up sometimes Saturday. I don't have the bandwidth for it at the moment.

Jon

[rhuss]

Originally posted by JWolf
Not yet. It'll go up sometimes Saturday. I don't have the bandwidth for it at the moment.

Jon

cool. just thought i missed it. can you post a message here when you start uploading it? thanks.

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
cool. just thought i missed it. can you post a message here when you start uploading it? thanks.

It's posting now.

Jon

[rhuss]

any particular reason why this is flac and not shn??

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
any particular reason why this is flac and not shn??

Because I like flac better. And since this is a fix, i can use flac. I won't convert just because. But I will when I fix something like this.

Jon

[rhuss]

Originally posted by JWolf
Because I like flac better. And since this is a fix, i can use flac. I won't convert just because. But I will when I fix something like this.

Jon

so i could convert to wav and then shn them without any problems.

thought md5's for FLAC files was a big 'no no'?

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
so i could convert to wav and then shn them without any problems.

thought md5's for FLAC files was a big 'no no'?

Nope. You can't. Format convertion just for the sake of format conversion is wrong. That creates another seed and that's not a good idea. If it is flac, leave it. If it is SHN leave it. And by being in flac, you'll know you have the fixed set vs the unfixed set since the unfixed is in SHN and the fixed in flac. And besides, I have created id3 tages for this so when you play it in Winamp, it will display the artist and track title.

MD5 is not file format dependent. And until the flac people get fingerprints automated the way MD5 is, I'll keep incuding MD5 and fingerprints. A fingerprint is basically an MD5 is the uncompressed audio inside a FLAC file.

Jon

[rhuss]

every other dmb seed that i have seen and downloaded (unless its 24 bit) has been shn. i don't see the benefits of this show in flac. your just going to confuse more people.

and if i want to convert it to shn i can. there is nothing stopping me. i can look in the info and see i got the fixed set.

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
every other dmb seed that i have seen and downloaded (unless its 24 bit) has been shn. i don't see the benefits of this show in flac. your just going to confuse more people.

and if i want to convert it to shn i can. there is nothing stopping me. i can look in the info and see i got the fixed set.

So your saying people are dumb. That's not wright. I seeded this via BT and didn't have too many questions on the format and those I did they were able to deal with it once I pointed them to the FLAC installer for Windows. And after I put up the FLAC info on my site, the questions dropped even more.

And don not convert it to SHN. That's rude. I posted it for you. I guess we live and learn.

Jon

[rhuss]

Originally posted by JWolf
So your saying people are dumb. That's not wright. I seeded this via BT and didn't have too many questions on the format and those I did they were able to deal with it once I pointed them to the FLAC installer for Windows. And after I put up the FLAC info on my site, the questions dropped even more.


i'm not saying people are dumb. i'm saying for some people it wasn't easy for some to learn shn, now they have to learn flac too just cause there is 1 seed in flac. have you seen the amount of questions in this forum about mkw, etc.

Originally posted by JWolf
And don not convert it to SHN. That's rude. I posted it for you. I guess we live and learn.

wasn't the original conversion shn? so wasn't that rude of you to change the format to flac? i'm not trying to cause a stir here. just doesn't really make sense to me to have 1 seed in flac and all 500 DMB or however many seeds in shn.

yes, i'm glad you posted it. thanks.

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
i'm not saying people are dumb. i'm saying for some people it wasn't easy for some to learn shn, now they have to learn flac too just cause there is 1 seed in flac. have you seen the amount of questions in this forum about mkw, etc.

I've been downloading Bonnaroo shows and some of them are in flac format. Eventually, flac will take over from shn or at least be more used then it is now and they'll have to learn to use it someday. Now is as good a time as any. Plus, for Windows, the flac installer makes life with flac so easy. It installs flac, the Winamp 2 plugin, and the Nero plugin (as long as you have Winamp2 and Nero installed). All you have to do is run the frontend, select the files, tell it the output directory and go. It's that easy for decoding. And Winamp 2 will play flac with the plugin. And if you use Nero, you can burn from flac to audio without needing to run the frontend to decode. That can't get any easier.


Originally posted by rhuss
wasn't the original conversion shn? so wasn't that rude of you to change the format to flac? i'm not trying to cause a stir here. just doesn't really make sense to me to have 1 seed in flac and all 500 DMB or however many seeds in shn./B]

The format change is actually a good idea in this case because you'll know it is the correct version that you want when you find it because it is flac and not shn. Also the flac files are smaller then the shn files (if they were made fromt he same wav files). I think (not 100% sure here) that the flac files may be larger then the shn I started with because the audio has gotten longer then it was since it was slowed down to fix the speed issue it originally had. Changing formats is not a good idea just because you like flac or shn better then the other. The only time it's a good idea to pick the format you want is when the source has changed like this one has.


Originally posted by rhuss
[B]yes, i'm glad you posted it. thanks.

Your welcome and I am sorry for getting a bit testy.

Jon

[rhuss]

Originally posted by JWolf
The format change is actually a good idea in this case because you'll know it is the correct version that you want when you find it because it is flac and not shn. Also the flac files are smaller then the shn files (if they were made fromt he same wav files). I think (not 100% sure here) that the flac files may be larger then the shn I started with because the audio has gotten longer then it was since it was slowed down to fix the speed issue it originally had. Changing formats is not a good idea just because you like flac or shn better then the other. The only time it's a good idea to pick the format you want is when the source has changed like this one has.

i guess the whole point i am trying to make is everything DMB that is new (2003) is being seeded as shn (except 24 bit sources in which FLAC makes sense), so why put 1 source out as flac. other older sources have been converted/re-converted and fixed since flac has been out, but they are re-seeded as shn still.

as far as telling i have the correct version, well there is the info file to look at and if i remeber correctly each file had 'fixed' in the name. i'm assuming you did that. also if you put the md5's and info file on etree then you could just verify against that.

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
i guess the whole point i am trying to make is everything DMB that is new (2003) is being seeded as shn (except 24 bit sources in which FLAC makes sense), so why put 1 source out as flac. other older sources have been converted/re-converted and fixed since flac has been out, but they are re-seeded as shn still.

But one thing I did do was make it larger then it was originally. So One reason to use flac is smaller files. Lesss to download. And another reason is because I can. It's not a reconvert so it's ok to do so.

Originally posted by rhuss
as far as telling i have the correct version, well there is the info file to look at and if i remeber correctly each file had 'fixed' in the name. i'm assuming you did that. also if you put the md5's and info file on etree then you could just verify against that.

I know you can do all that with the SHN. BUT! I've already seeded it to etree. So you'll be comparing SHN md5 to FLAC md5. Not a good match. Best idea is t leave it as is and let it be in flac.

[rhuss]

flac is fine since u already spread it, but until the taper community switches to flac i would still use shn no matter what it is: reconvert, fix, convert, etc.

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
flac is fine since u already spread it, but until the taper community switches to flac i would still use shn no matter what it is: reconvert, fix, convert, etc.

Some already are using flac. And to wait to use it is wrong. It's here, it works, and I will use it when approprate.

Jon

[rhuss]

Originally posted by JWolf
Some already are using flac. And to wait to use it is wrong. It's here, it works, and I will use it when approprate.

Jon

who? i am specifically refering to DMB here. i'm talking using flac for other than 24 bit sources.

shn is here and it works.

*i swear this discussion has happened before*

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
who? i am specifically refering to DMB here. i'm talking using flac for other than 24 bit sources.

shn is here and it works.

*i swear this discussion has happened before*

Flac is here and it works better. It does not need to have seek tables to seek in Winamp. It makes smaller compressed files. It has an option to fx sector boundry errors when it compressses. It handles 24-bit. And I'm not 100% sure here, but I think it may not compress if the WAV file has a bad header.

Jon

[rhuss]

Originally posted by JWolf
Flac is here and it works better. It does not need to have seek tables to seek in Winamp. It makes smaller compressed files. It has an option to fx sector boundry errors when it compressses. It handles 24-bit. And I'm not 100% sure here, but I think it may not compress if the WAV file has a bad header.

Jon

ok. the 24 bit i agree with you on. if the source is 24 bit use flac.

seeks tables aren't a huge deal.

file size - 433mb to 419mb thats not that much smaller

also here's a good point from an archive.org thread:

there is *no* way to decode flac in mac OS 9. so those users still on 9 then can't enjoy a show. for those people who say "upgrade to os x," i say why? it's no different from all the windows users still on win2k...

http://webdev.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=5745

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
ok. the 24 bit i agree with you on. if the source is 24 bit use flac.

seeks tables aren't a huge deal.

file size - 433mb to 419mb thats not that much smaller

also here's a good point from an archive.org thread:



http://webdev.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=5745

I just looked and most of the people who replied say to keep the flac and go with the flac. Ha!

Jon

[Joe M.]

would be cool to hear and answer to this:

Posted by Erich on http://webdev.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=5745
honest question, scott - if support for OS 9 was implimented, would you feel flac16 to be a good replacement for shn?

[JWolf]

Originally posted by Joe M.
would be cool to hear and answer to this:

Posted by Erich on http://webdev.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=5745

The problem is that the open source community doesn't care about OS 9. The solution... upgrade to OS X.

Jon

[Joe M.]

Originally posted by JWolf
The problem is that the open source community doesn't care about OS 9. The solution... upgrade to OS X.

Jon

lol. That wasn't the question. But why should someone have to upgrade to enjoy music? No one would make a new file format that only XP users can use and tell everyone else to upgrade.

Here are more reads on the matter:
http://www.antsmarching.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28247
http://www.antsmarching.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49700

[JWolf]

Originally posted by Joe M.
lol. That wasn't the question. But why should someone have to upgrade to enjoy music? No one would make a new file format that only XP users can use and tell everyone else to upgrade.

Here are more reads on the matter:
http://www.antsmarching.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28247
http://www.antsmarching.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=49700

Livephish.com is switching over from SHN to FLAC.

And the source code is open source. So what needs to be done for OS 9 is to find someone who is willing and can convert. Nobody seems willing to do it because developers prefer OS X.

Jon

[rhuss]

Originally posted by JWolf
The problem is that the open source community doesn't care about OS 9. The solution... upgrade to OS X.

Jon

thats not a solution, thats a cop out. backwards compatibility.

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
thats not a solution, thats a cop out. backwards compatibility.

There are people still running Windows95. And there is software that won't work with it. Shall we keep suporting that too? There comes a time with you have to move forward. This is it. Unless you can find someone who can and will convert to OS 9.

Jon

[rhuss]

Originally posted by JWolf
There are people still running Windows95. And there is software that won't work with it

that is such a general statement. we are talking specifically shn and flac.

actually i still run win95 on one pc and have never had any problems with shn or mkwact for that matter.

so your saying just so people can use flac they have to upgrade to OS X? who's paying that bill?

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
that is such a general statement. we are talking specifically shn and flac.

actually i still run win95 on one pc and have never had any problems with shn or mkwact for that matter.

so your saying just so people can use flac they have to upgrade to OS X? who's paying that bill?

I know shorten and flac run on Win95. But there is more and more software that won't run on Win95 these days. The thing is, it's called progress. I know a lot of people who have upgraded to XP because of how poorly mkwACT runs with WindowsME. Unfortunately, I'm seeing a lot of open source software for the MAC that is not OS 9 compatible. The MAC OS X 3.2.2a BitTorrent client is not going to run on OS 9 or even OS X prior to Jaguar because Apple change something in OS X 10.2 and that means it's not 100% compatible with the prior version. You can run python and the BT source on OS 9. But a lot of people don't know how to do that. The reasl solution to this problem is to upgrade. The problem is going to get worse and not better. More and more software will be OS X ony and not OS 9 and they will be left out.

Jon

[rhuss]

i don't see any compelling argument to move to flac and obviously none of the DMB tapers do either since they are seeding their 16 bit sources in shn. really thats all that matters to me.

[JWolf]

Originally posted by rhuss
i don't see any compelling argument to move to flac and obviously none of the DMB tapers do either since they are seeding their 16 bit sources in shn. really thats all that matters to me.

I for one will use flac if I ever fix up any more shows other then shntool fixing.

Jon

[rhuss]

Originally posted by JWolf
I for one will use flac if I ever fix up any more shows other then shntool fixing.

Jon

so i don't have to worry too much then??

:lol

now i'm just joking with ya. my brain is tired from working and this thread ... why isn't it friday yet??