REC
Active topics
  1. Originally posted by hoserama:Well you can always compare RMS of a recording, which may get you in the ballpark. But really...just turn DOWN the volume of the U2-2, since they cranked it to a painfully high level.
    Well I'll take all the advice from yourself and Sergio on board, I'm a novice at all this stuff so appreciate it.
  2. Gotta start somewhere! I was a bright eyed ambitious 15 year old when I first started and knew nothing.
  3. Your the standard as far as I'm concerned Hoserama! Your boots sound perfect in the boat and car! I know what you're saying deanallison, I hate when I jump in the shower crank on a playlist for the first song then the second song I either can't hear or it's way to loud and fraps the speaker the whole shower...
  4. Well I'm 10 years late already lol. But picking up tips along the way from someone that obviously knows what they're talking about helps.
  5. It ain't about the age, but about just starting somewhere.

    I had this discussion with another taper friend of mine (taping seriously since 2009). He gets intimidated about the mixing/mastering process. I told him if he had just started messing with it since 2009, he'd already be well past the initial intimidation and learning curve. Just accept that all your initial efforts will be bad and rough, but you have to keep experimenting through it.
  6. Originally posted by hoserama:It ain't about the age, but about just starting somewhere.

    I had this discussion with another taper friend of mine (taping seriously since 2009). He gets intimidated about the mixing/mastering process. I told him if he had just started messing with it since 2009, he'd already be well past the initial intimidation and learning curve. Just accept that all your initial efforts will be bad and rough, but you have to keep experimenting through it.
    That sounds very familiar actually, I'm a bit frightened to make mistakes and not patient enough with it either at times, I've also got a young daughter so even less time these days but yeah I definitely need to learn there's stages and that the results might not be great to begin with but I've got to persevere.
  7. An IEM/Audience matrix for Vertigo Brussels 2005-06-10 now available in our show pages.
  8. Happy to announce a brand new JT2017 bootleg! It's a Pasadena 1 recording made with an iPhone 6s (internal mics - mono) and exclusively shared with u2start

    I think it's a somewhat vintage sounding 3 star bootleg, and quite alright to listen to.

    Enjoy
  9. Can you clarify on the rating system?

    Do you mean vintage three stars like that recording would have been three stars in 1987 but not so today?

    I know a stars based rating system in inherently subjective (I'd rank most recordings released with one to two stars), so I guess I need to ask for narrative based review too!
  10. Originally posted by hoserama:Can you clarify on the rating system?

    Do you mean vintage three stars like that recording would have been three stars in 1987 but not so today?

    I know a stars based rating system in inherently subjective (I'd rank most recordings released with one to two stars), so I guess I need to ask for narrative based review too!
    From our FAQ:
    5 stars: Near-Perfect Proper Recording; could be released as a proper live album (it may have already).
    4.5 stars: Good Proper Recording; recording sounds great, but doesn't properly represent event i.e. improper mix/incomplete soundboard (poor audience to band ratio/one sided to a certain performer).
    4 stars: Excellent Audience Recording; top-tier recording of the show from the crowd with all elements clear and audible, as it should be.
    3.5 stars: Great Audience Recording; quality recording of the show from the crowd but minor problems start occurring (screaming or talking/shifts in quality/age or poor handling).
    3 stars: Good Audience Recording; fine recording of the show but the minor problems begin occurring more frequently.
    2.5 stars: Average Audience Recording; the performance is there but major problems begin popping up (too much screaming or talking/unwieldy shifts in quality/source damage beyond repair).
    2 stars: Fair Audience Recording; no performance just problems with the source.
    1.5 stars: Poor Audience Recording; you were standing outside the performance area, weren't you?
    1 star: Abysmal Audience Recording; mind as well be two hours of you babbling your finger against your lips.

    And yes, very subjective. This is why we always include an audio sample, so users themselves can judge
  11. Originally posted by hoserama:Can you clarify on the rating system?

    Do you mean vintage three stars like that recording would have been three stars in 1987 but not so today?

    I know a stars based rating system in inherently subjective (I'd rank most recordings released with one to two stars), so I guess I need to ask for narrative based review too!
    With "somewhat vintage sounding 3 star bootleg" I probably meant "somewhat vintage sounding, 3 star bootleg" - hope the comma makes that subtitle difference

    Anyway, as rating is indeed subjective - what else! - it may differ from person to person. In principle I try to rate the 80-ies recordings the same way as the more recent ones.

    PS: in my initial reply I also had a link to the FAQ, but Remy beat me to it
  12. I can see on the syntactic difference there

    Thanks for posting the stars FAQ. I almost feel there should be a different ranking system for audience recordings vs SBD/ALD/IEM/Line recordings of some sort. I've seen a bunch of horrible wireless recordings get high rankings just for the novelty of it.