REC
Active topics
1992-08-16 - Washington
 Tour: ZOO TV
Songs played: 23
Audio recordings: 3
Videos: 1
  1. Originally posted by LSMelo:[..]

    Very good, noiseless. We thank you (again!) for the lossless files.

    And by the way, Sarajevo is a great bootleg of yours.

    And by the way, I have Fradoca remaster of Santiago (Popmart) bootleg. But WTSHNN isn't of that show. Is from Sarajevo.

    Is there any Santiago complete version around? Would like to have it.


    Yes, a complete version exists, although I don't have it.
    The story as Francesco told me is that the last part of WTSHNN in the original suddenly turns mono (if I remember well - it might also have been damaged or something). That's why Francesco used my Sarajevo source to replace that part. The first part of the song is really from Santiago. I agree it sounds a bit weird to hear Bono shout out Sarajevo in Santiago but, well, everybody makes his own choices.
  2. Originally posted by noiseless:[..]

    Well.

    Maybe.

    I like sharing good music.

    But there's an increasing tendency aboard that I don't quite like. For instance, when I shared the only listenable version of Montréal 2011, about the first thing to happen was someone sharing an inferior source stating it was an 'upgrade'.

    I'm way less vain than people might think and if someone shares a real upgrade over my work I'm sincerely happy. But unfortunately it rarely happens.

    When I share something, I always check the files for all technical flaws you can possibly think of - whether you like my work or not, my files always are properly mastered, de-essed, free of skips and clicks, properly stereo imaged, decently EQ'd, and so on. For most shows, this takes several days, if not weeks.

    So, if someone throws in a 'remaster' a few minutes after I share a version I worked on for days, that's a plain insult. And it's the more insulting because out of 50,000 members no-one seems to be willing to discuss technical pros and contras of different sources.

    It leads me to think most people don't give a flying fuck about a proper mastered show, and call everything 'a matter of taste'. I disagree. A bootleg that is distorted as a result of poor 'remastering' is a bad bootleg and that is not a matter of taste, it's a matter of vandalism.

    So. I'm getting more hesitant in sharing lossless files. In the first place because people might butcher them. In the second place because, as stated, I rarely notice people actually care.

    So again, it's not out of vanity but I do want people to care. Not about me - I'm just a random prick - but about the music. So: care. Comment, discuss, flatter, flame, hate me, love me, anything. But really I'm not sharing anything anymore when people don't seem to appreciate it.

    All in all I chose to throw in a lossless version of this show as soon as 50 different people have commented on this. That's a lousy 0,1% of the U2start community.

    When no-one cares, why would I share?




    Sorry, for before thing it forgives mine bad English; I am a fan and collector of bootleg of U2, I am not a technical audio.
    My ears work well for understanding that your remasters are great jobs.
    At times I find it hard to leave comments writings in English, however I assure you that the most beautiful recordings I grab her and then I burn on CD,
    print cover and this it does me happy.
    Have just seen the post with a' other remaster noiseless, has grabbed immediately and this plays really well!
    I am me said that it would be beautiful to share the flacs file so that to insert in my collection. Someone, can make (if it has the wish to do him/it)
    even some covers with the credits and street saying..
    This being freely creative free spirit of sharing as many other members do. I didn't want to be offensive. But if don't want codividere you are free
    to do him/it. Meanwhile I gather the occasion to thank you for all the jobs done by you before this, which I obviously have listened and appreciated.
    As it regards the flacs file not inporta, I always have the mp3s file for my ipod.
    I hope that you understand.. hi Roberto.
  3. Hi Roberto. Thanks! My comment wasn't personal in any way, I just wanted to get something of my chest in general.
    And I'm planning to upload the flacs next weekend.

    Cheers!
  4. Originally posted by noiseless:Hi Roberto. Thanks! My comment wasn't personal in any way, I just wanted to get something of my chest in general.
    And I'm planning to upload the flacs next weekend.

    Cheers!




    No problem, only an explanation. Thanks for the loading of the flacs file. To grab after the vacations. I now listen Washington-Matrix superb job!
  5. Originally posted by noiseless:[..]

    Well.

    Maybe.

    I like sharing good music.

    But there's an increasing tendency aboard that I don't quite like. For instance, when I shared the only listenable version of Montréal 2011, about the first thing to happen was someone sharing an inferior source stating it was an 'upgrade'.

    I'm way less vain than people might think and if someone shares a real upgrade over my work I'm sincerely happy. But unfortunately it rarely happens.

    When I share something, I always check the files for all technical flaws you can possibly think of - whether you like my work or not, my files always are properly mastered, de-essed, free of skips and clicks, properly stereo imaged, decently EQ'd, and so on. For most shows, this takes several days, if not weeks.

    So, if someone throws in a 'remaster' a few minutes after I share a version I worked on for days, that's a plain insult. And it's the more insulting because out of 50,000 members no-one seems to be willing to discuss technical pros and contras of different sources.

    It leads me to think most people don't give a flying fuck about a proper mastered show, and call everything 'a matter of taste'. I disagree. A bootleg that is distorted as a result of poor 'remastering' is a bad bootleg and that is not a matter of taste, it's a matter of vandalism.

    So. I'm getting more hesitant in sharing lossless files. In the first place because people might butcher them. In the second place because, as stated, I rarely notice people actually care.

    So again, it's not out of vanity but I do want people to care. Not about me - I'm just a random prick - but about the music. So: care. Comment, discuss, flatter, flame, hate me, love me, anything. But really I'm not sharing anything anymore when people don't seem to appreciate it.

    All in all I chose to throw in a lossless version of this show as soon as 50 different people have commented on this. That's a lousy 0,1% of the U2start community.

    When no-one cares, why would I share?



    Please don't imagine that the lack of comment is due to a lack of gratitude. For some of us, it is somewhat intimidating to post any comment in a forum where there are so many more experienced members commenting--sometimes negatively--about a given topic. Speaking personally, I often read some of the back and forth commentary and realize that I don't even know what the feck the argument is about! I do understand that when you take the effort to make files that represent hours of your hard work available it is frustrating when only a few people make the effort to say thank you. I am sure that there are many people like myself that have been lax about expressing appreciation to you and all the others that make U2start the great gathering spot and resource that it is. I sincerely thank you all for all your herculean efforts--you are not taken for granted!
  6. O really I don't bother much about lack of gratitude, it's more the lack of discussion when it comes to good or the best sources that I miss, especially from people who do like to add new sources or reworked shows.

    In my opinion, everyone is better off when people actually explain why their version could be an upgrade.

    I realize a bunch of people wouldn't know what those discussions would be about and it may even sound intimidating to casual collectors as you say.

    But on the other side, when various shows are shared with only stating 'this is an upgrade' or 'this is the best', that's at least as confusing because no-one will ever know what source to download.

    That's the reason I usually explain what I did to a source to enhance it. Not to impress anyone, but simply to let people know WHY it is better than another source. And that's why I'm not happy when someone shares a show only saying it's better without any explanation, because then I'm wasting time or ratio to download it only to find out it's worthless.

    Thanks for replying. I know I often leave rude comments but in fact I just want good music being shared.

    And I like discussion.

    Cheers
  7. Gonna listen to it now

    Love your work
  8. You do have a very good ear--the difference you made in the Montreal show by the the phase correction was fantastic!

    I just went back and reread the comments made after you posted the corrected version. Now I understand what you're talking about, you were asking why someone thought their version was better. I got it now.

    You do great work!
  10. Added it, didnt delete the sources. We like to have a db with 'all' source

    Didnt have time to listen to the whole show yet, but the songs i listened to sound amazing!
  11. Originally posted by Risto:Added it, didnt delete the sources. We like to have a db with 'all' source

    Didnt have time to listen to the whole show yet, but the songs i listened to sound amazing!


    And now with live-feeling!
  12. I appreciate the compliment Timo, but lots of people like the directness of a raw soundboard, too. So it's the perfect choice to keep the SBD available.