do remasters fit with the site's mission statement?

[theface07]

This really is a pointless and redundant argument. People keep claiming "preserve the raw original recordings". These are bootlegs. Unless there is 100% confirmation that the recording is direct from a master source, you will NEVER get the raw original recording. Furthermore, even if a recording did come direct from the master source, whos to say that the person who transferred it did so adequately and without significant alteration to the original recording? Most bootlegs, YES EVEN ON THIS SITE THAT APPARENTLY PRESERVES MASTER RECORDINGS, have been "tinkered" with in one way or another, especially silver discs that often don't even have the correct pitch!
And don't even talk about audience recordings taken from some cassette tape. If it isn't from the original master, it has been "tinkered" with greatly, either through editing or simple degradation from high generation tape transfers. If someone can take a dirty sounding tape transfer and make it sound better, it shouldn't be considered musical sacrilege. 99.9% of the time, an audience recording once it gets to flac or shn format on this site or any others has already changed dramatically from it's original form.

It's sad to see immature and uneducated comments of a personal nature where the only arguments should be based on audio fidelity and edited techniques. Such people are the real polluters and do nothing but taint this forum with negativity and a teenage mentality. Even if I or anyone else who uploads a remastered recording does a horrible job, there is nowhere that says you have to download it. It's too bad this is being made an issue. There are a lot of other things that should be addressed that are "actual" problems.
Thanks to those who are rational and attempt to actually discuss things without resorting to childish attacks. Just for the record, here are some of the enlightened messages Dana Gillespie has been sending my way:

"and by the way, you are very easily taken in, and you reveal far to much about yourself. I'm guessing the Parson's Nose was your mother's favourite part of the turkey she married? is that right?"

"A REAL MAN WOULD NEVER HAVE REACTED AT ALL (can you understand that? testosterone kicks in and the shit you don't want to hear just goes over your head). come out to L.A., i'll introduce you to some of the quietest men you ever met: all of them quiet because they have nothing to prove, but they'd cut your throat without blinking if you asked for it.
maybe you'll understand that one day, little boy.
i ain't the first person on this site to note that you take things very personally; i won't be the last.
sad for you that you let a frigging woman upset you.
sad piece of dog shit. "

"oh yeah, i forget, you're SO intellectual... you sad fucking idiot; you miss half of the comments made to you because you're so fucking dumb. you are very sad, trying to boost your ego by playing around with other people's music... why don't you make some music of your own??? oh... i guess you can't.
dumb mother-fucker.... if it wasn't so obvious that you live at home with your mother, i'd guess that she was dead and that you were fucking her corpse on a daily basis.
if you had balls, you wouldn't react to criticism.... you fucking moron. "

"Oh dear... you sad, pathetic little child.
grow some balls."

And this is all because of my attempt to defend a remastered recording I uploaded. Such people are a real scourge and make no attempt to back up their criticism with actual facts or points. According to Dana, I need to grow some balls and be a real man because of my desire to defend my work.

Originally Posted by theface07

I need to grow some balls and be a real man because of my desire to defend my work.

Work?
Gee, you sure sound egocentric when you put it like that.
re: the quotes that you posted....
but, hey, wait a minute, FACE07... you only posted the things that I said...... are you painting a fair and balanced picture of this conversation??? i mean, a really fair picture???

anyone can check The Who, Munich '72 thread. anyone can see how it happened: i say "you've reduced the bass", then you say "I'm personally offended", then i ask "do you remaster for your ego", then you say "don't get personal!!!!"

but, FACE07, you took it personal way back when it was just a little criticism of the "remaster"...... you need a little more confidence in your work.

[Five]

Originally Posted by DanielG

Some people have no idea what they're talking about.

its elementary to prove/disprove whether a fileset is identical or not. seriously.

[rspencer]

Originally Posted by theface07

This really is a pointless and redundant argument. People keep claiming "preserve the raw original recordings". These are bootlegs. Unless there is 100% confirmation that the recording is direct from a master source, you will NEVER get the raw original recording.

Thus making any alteration merely that, not remastering. It can be EQed, normalized, pitch-corrected, sped up or slowed down, but without using the master, it is not remastering.

[faninor]

I've not missed the point at all. Pay no attention to these attention-seeking folk? That is my solution.

The point is where would one draw the line? Does only the taper (or perhaps initial seeder? someone in between?) have the right to tweak the recording for it to be ttd-appropriate? I don't expect all tapers to be experienced with editing and mastering -- some people just aren't as interested in that stuff. Sure, some (a lot) of what people do with remasters is subjective but not all of it.

Much better solution would be to add some requirement for documenting what exactly was done in the remaster work, maybe require both before and after samples so we don't have to download completely blindly, form a safe list etc. It doesn't make sense to me for the site not to allow an improved recording to be posted.

What if a taper forgets/loses his mics but another taper shares his signal so that they end up with identical recordings, then each goes home and masters their own copy with differing results? Is one more suitable for circulation than the other? And is a 44.1kHz/16bit version of a recording allowed after the 96kHz/24bit version has already been seeded? You have to place rules and rationalize all of these possibilities -- it's not as simple as, say, minidisc masters.

[freezer]

Originally Posted by jfaninord

...Much better solution would be to add some requirement for documenting what exactly was done in ....

OK, that would just about exclude almost all "silver" bootlegs, right? You AIN'T getting much documentation on ANY 'silvers', hmmmm?

WHO knows what 'tweaking' is done by the bootleg 'labels' in addition to not knowing any other lineage on them there 'silvers'....

Hell, there's some "remaster-ers" out there that specialize in using unknown gen recordings and then "tweaking" the lineage also.... oops, sorry, "tweaking lineage"...sorry, I meant to say that they call it "speculating on the lineage" or "guesstimating the lineage"

and you can find some of these in the ABT forum here and now.

oh well.....

[AAR.oner]

Originally Posted by jfaninord

form a safe list etc. It doesn't make sense to me for the site not to allow an improved recording to be posted.

[freezer]

So who's to say which recording has been "improved" by 'tweaking',

especially IF the unblemished recording IS NOT used for said 'tweaking'???

[AAR.oner]

staff

and if people don't like it, tough shit...d/l from another site

[freezer]

Originally Posted by AAR.oner

staff

and if people don't like it, tough shit...d/l from another site

By the way, what if the original taper doesn't like the "remaster" ???

Still going to allow it at TTD and stick it to the taper?

[Five]

technically, it could happen, but we would do our utmost to prevent this, communicate with everybody involved.

[pmonk]

I think zep phan does a real good job - so his stuff should be board approved!

[Five]

yeah, that's pretty much a given

[dcbullet]

Originally Posted by freezer

By the way, what if the original taper doesn't like the "remaster" ???

Still going to allow it at TTD and stick it to the taper?

We don't pull shows at the tapers request. If the taper doesn't want his show messed with, he shouldn't circulate it. And I'm not going to try to police and figure out which taper is real or not. This is the internet. How the hell do I know who is who?

[freezer]

Originally Posted by dcbullet

We don't pull shows at the tapers request.

Maybe that should be clearly stated as part of the site's mission statement. Very clearly stated.


But, yeah, we all remember those U2 threads about just that.

And I remember that a certain tape in question was already acknowleged to be that of the guy making the complaints.

And he got nowhere, we all remember it well. (Even though Pete Schweddy and his attorney might not be visible any longer....)

Originally Posted by dcbullet

If the taper doesn't want his show messed with, he shouldn't circulate it.

No kidding.

Maybe that should be stated as part of the site's mission statement also.

Originally Posted by dcbullet

And I'm not going to try to police and figure out which taper is real or not. This is the internet. How the hell do I know who is who?

Well, maybe it shouldn't be left up to you if you can't tell. Honestly, why should you be expected to do a job or task you can't figure out?

Maybe there needs to be someone on staff that specializes in knowing about master recordings and the myriad remaster-ers that now abound.


This is only a discussion, these are only suggestions.

Hell, the site could continue with the status quo and a mod can kill this discussion and that's the end of that.

You folks don't need to ban remasters or even "remasters of remasters", especially when there are multiple versions of the same show from different bootleggers already available here. And doing quite well, bringing in lots of new members, many of whom don't really care about who what when where and why, as long as it sounds 'good'.


Maybe this discussion about "quality over quantity" as a part of the site's mission statement is a non-issue considering what percent of the site's traffic in only interested in the "tunez" -- not where the recording came from nor how many levels of eq are now layered on said recording.



TTD might only need a way to sort out all the "remaster-ers"....after all, "you can't tell the players without a scorecard" -- right?