The Traders' Den  

  The Traders' Den > Where we go to learn ..... > Site Announcements & Suggestions
 

Notices

Site Announcements & Suggestions This is where you should make your suggestions to us on how to improve your experience here and where to post about site problems/issues.
Moderators

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #106  
Old 2010-11-23, 12:52 AM
paddington's Avatar
paddington paddington is offline
please look after this bear
TTD Staff
83.17 GB/882.10 GB/10.61
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freezer View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by jameskg View Post
We likely would, as long as it wasn't lossy and I'm not denying it.

We give members an opportunity to have bootleg silvers without having to pay, as long as they are not lossy and are extracted properly from the silver.


don't be grumpy

be happy!

You finally decided to be truthful, Groucho.... how'd that happen?



That means this dust-up was ONLY about someone's entitlement issues, after all.

I think it is more of a referendum on the actions of an idiot.
__________________
"There are some of these recordings where it is just a whirring, and you cannot hear the music. " - Jimmy Page, 2007 / JUL / 26
  #107  
Old 2010-11-23, 02:58 AM
freezer's Avatar
freezer freezer is offline
TTD VIP
0.00 KB/0.00 KB/---
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in your worst nightmare
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jameskg View Post
I think it is more of a referendum on the actions of an idiot.
Aw, don't be so hard on yourself, yer a fool, hardly an idiot, Groucho.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by jameskg View Post
I don't think I troll anyone, other than freezer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by U2Lynne View Post
You wall-eyed apple-knocking pig-fuckers! You don't know shit!
  #108  
Old 2010-11-23, 10:58 AM
TFEC's Avatar
TFEC TFEC is offline
479.41 GB/609.44 GB/1.27
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Maybe it's some sort of variant on the Stockholm Syndrome, but after reading Freezer's comments on various message boards over the years, he's starting to make sense!
  #109  
Old 2010-11-23, 10:58 AM
AAR.oner's Avatar
AAR.oner AAR.oner is offline
TTD Staff
1.11 TB/1.41 TB/1.27
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Appalachia
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

dead horses & cooking utensils




back on topic, i'm fairly sure staff is in agreement that although this instance of "watermarking" [and all watermarking in general] is completely ridiculous and unnecessary, trying to police every recording for "marks" is impossible...and banning them would only encourage folks who employ this tactic to come up with more creative ways to do so, further muddying up the pool

hopefully in the future, when a recording is stated to have, or found to have, a "mark" by a d/l'er, they will make it public knowledge in the thread and others will be able to choose whether or not they want to d/l it...much like how "re-masters" are handled
__________________
TTD's Gear Lust Forum -- info & reviews on taping gear
The Basics of EQing
  #110  
Old 2010-11-23, 11:27 AM
dcbullet's Avatar
dcbullet dcbullet is offline
Anti-Temperance League
TTD Staff
68.39 GB/422.37 GB/6.18
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freezer View Post
You guys will allow that Toolemen remaster if Godfather releases it as a silver bootleg, and you know you will.

You always said that all silver boots are allowable as "Source zero" as you two have proudly proclaimed in the past.

You and Billy the Bullet have said as much in the past. R E P E A T E D L Y said so.

Anything else and that makes you the Queen of Denial, James-KY
Actually, this is false. Silvers are difficult to moderate, that's for sure. As James-KY has indicated, we generally do allow Silvers, warts and all. However, we certainty do pull them. Lossy is the easiest example. If show had one source that was clearly superior to other releases of the same source, I would certainly pull the inferior releases, even if silver. There may be other situations where a silver will be pulled.

In short, we won't ever make perfect decisions all the time but you can be assured that not all silvers are welcome here.

Hope that helps.
  #111  
Old 2010-11-23, 12:10 PM
freezer's Avatar
freezer freezer is offline
TTD VIP
0.00 KB/0.00 KB/---
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in your worst nightmare
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcbullet View Post
Actually, this is false.
If you say so, but considering the "source", it's a given.


Quote:
Originally Posted by dcbullet View Post
In short, we won't ever make perfect decisions all the time but you can be assured that not all silvers are welcome here.

Hope that helps.
Billy, you already allowed lossy sourced boots here, but never mind, your rationalizations have most definitely shown your true colors again.


And you already have proven that you and jimmy-KY don't have the foggiest clue about how many recordings were made.

No bullshit, Hurricane Billy-Bob, remember.
And yes, it did help.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by jameskg View Post
I don't think I troll anyone, other than freezer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by U2Lynne View Post
You wall-eyed apple-knocking pig-fuckers! You don't know shit!
  #112  
Old 2010-11-23, 12:15 PM
dcbullet's Avatar
dcbullet dcbullet is offline
Anti-Temperance League
TTD Staff
68.39 GB/422.37 GB/6.18
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freezer View Post
Billy, you already allowed lossy sourced boots here,
Please report them.
  #113  
Old 2010-11-23, 01:52 PM
kingjman's Avatar
kingjman kingjman is offline
The King of all Me
142.13 GB/650.39 GB/4.58
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Minnesota
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

So then we all agree on lowest gen with correct linage listed?

IMO it was just a waste of time for him to remaster.
He was not successful at what he was trying to accomplish.
He wanted credit for cleaning up a recording...
Not much credit 'cause he didn't really clean it up by adding impurities.
...and it's not gonna prevent sales of his mixes by so-called progressive rock
restoration groups in such far-flung and exotic locations as Atlanta.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by freezer View Post
"it's all about kingjman".
  #114  
Old 2010-11-23, 08:02 PM
Five's Avatar
Five Five is offline
TTD Staff
186.65 GB/588.32 GB/3.15
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Canada
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TFEC View Post
Maybe it's some sort of variant on the Stockholm Syndrome, but after reading Freezer's comments on various message boards over the years, he's starting to make sense!
Yes I agree there's gold in these posts. Here Freezer is giving his take on keeping the trading pool clean & makes sense:

Quote:
Originally Posted by freezer View Post
The recording that Tooleman put the watermark on is in circulation already anyway. Has been for years.

The easiest thing to do was just ignore this "Tooleman" version altogether and just take a deep breath and and wait five minutes until you can get an unblemished version without the marking.

It was just that easy....... this is all "much ado about nothing" -- right?

Step back and think about this.......... Within 5 years there'll be 52 competing versions available anyway.
Hardcore traders want the best available source... the unaltered original source.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingjman View Post
So then we all agree on lowest gen with correct linage listed?
Sometimes the master is not stored well and a 1st gen backup will sound better. But most of the time, absolutely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kingjman View Post
IMO it was just a waste of time for him to remaster.
He was not successful at what he was trying to accomplish.
He wanted credit for cleaning up a recording...
Not much credit 'cause he didn't really clean it up by adding impurities.
...and it's not gonna prevent sales of his mixes by so-called progressive rock
restoration groups in such far-flung and exotic locations as Atlanta.
Exactly

Quote:
Originally Posted by AAR.oner View Post
back on topic, i'm fairly sure staff is in agreement that although this instance of "watermarking" [and all watermarking in general] is completely ridiculous and unnecessary, trying to police every recording for "marks" is impossible...and banning them would only encourage folks who employ this tactic to come up with more creative ways to do so, further muddying up the pool

hopefully in the future, when a recording is stated to have, or found to have, a "mark" by a d/l'er, they will make it public knowledge in the thread and others will be able to choose whether or not they want to d/l it...much like how "re-masters" are handled
Yes, this is exactly how I feel.
__________________
Checksums Demystified EAC Config MakeTorrent WinAmp Config

Modern social theory casts a highly skeptical eye on any declaration that a group of persons is without conflict, and insists, on the contrary, that conflict is natural to groups, and even more, is essential to them. -Patrick Henry
  #115  
Old 2010-11-23, 08:05 PM
Five's Avatar
Five Five is offline
TTD Staff
186.65 GB/588.32 GB/3.15
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Canada
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucifer burns View Post
Wow...things are gettting "deep" over here.
Well i guess someone will upload it here eventually.
I'm the person who uploaded the "Non-watermarked" version over at DaD.
I'm not so well know over here i guess as i've become over there.

Hope everyone can get which ever version they chose.
I know it wasn't my place to tell somneone what they could or couldn't do and the bottom line for me personally is i just get enjoyment out of sharing what i have to share.

With that said, and no disrespect to the people like the "Tooleman" and many others that like to do "remasters", but at heart i'm a purest. I really am a collector of "Masters" and "Low Gens". I truly prefer them "unaltered".

But who am i to stop others from doing what they will do any.
I checked out alot of of the "remasters" done by the "tooleman" as well as many others.
Some of them are very good, but i ask this question?
How many times does a show need to be remastered and by how many different people??
It bad enough the "Offical" record labels are constantly "ripping off" the fans with "remasters" of Classic Lp's...i' mean seriously, how many re-masters have there been of say "Darkside Of The Moon!??
So now were gonna "remaster" live recordings???
THAT DON'T EVEN BELONG TO US!!???

Aagin no disrespect to the people that like to do this sort of thing, but to me they are really ruining the "gen pool".
__________________
Checksums Demystified EAC Config MakeTorrent WinAmp Config

Modern social theory casts a highly skeptical eye on any declaration that a group of persons is without conflict, and insists, on the contrary, that conflict is natural to groups, and even more, is essential to them. -Patrick Henry
  #116  
Old 2010-11-24, 12:01 AM
freezer's Avatar
freezer freezer is offline
TTD VIP
0.00 KB/0.00 KB/---
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in your worst nightmare
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcbullet View Post
Please report them.
Already did that, wasted my time trying to communicate seriously with you.

And that's no bullshit, Billy.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Five View Post
Yes I agree there's gold in these posts. Here Freezer is giving his take on keeping the trading pool clean & makes sense:

Quote:
Originally Posted by freezer View Post
The recording that Tooleman put the watermark on is in circulation already anyway. Has been for years.

The easiest thing to do was just ignore this "Tooleman" version altogether and just take a deep breath and and wait five minutes until you can get an unblemished version without the marking.

It was just that easy....... this is all "much ado about nothing" -- right?

Step back and think about this.......... Within 5 years there'll be 52 competing versions available anyway.
Hardcore traders want the best available source... the unaltered original source.

Five, you were away too long.....


Silver boots are considered source "ZERO" at this site and can and will be allowed, even to the point of competing with - in your own terminology- the best available source... the unaltered original source......That's why I've been laughing at all this foolish nonsense.




This is a hobby, nothing else. I made recordings at concerts as a part of MY hobby.

Many of you do the same, cool.

Many of you don't. Those that don't have to take what's offered and that's it.



IF that TOOLEMAN abomination/remaster had been first introduced to the TTD customers as a "SILVER BOOTLEG" there would be certain TTD ABT mods absolutely defending the decision to allow it at TTD.

Hell, Hurricane Billy Bob would be tumbling ass over elbows while running to defend it......period.


Like it or not, by allowing "SILVER BOOTLEGS" as stated policy at TTD, the policy is actually allowing bad remasters... fuck, let's say it properly, encouraging bad remasters to proliferate. As bad or worse than what TOOLEMAN did...and these "SILVER BOOTLEGS" allowed without any description or lineage as to the remastering devices used.

None of us have any idea what a bootlegger does to remaster his garbage product, yet TTD's policy is to allow them so nobody has to buy the bootleggers' wares.

OK, cool........understood.



TOOLEMAN gave something away freely, and honestly said UP FRONT what he did about marking the recording so each and every downloader could make their own decisions about this remaster. Well, shit-fire, let's punish him and rip him a new one in the process for this. Even though nobody was forced to suck it down.

NOBODY had to take it, and some collectors in that thread were thanking TOOLEMAN.... the whiners missed that.

Empress Valley or C&D or Godfather or whoever your favorite flavor of bootlegger is, well, TTD will allow their pisspoor remasters -- and the BootBoys give NO details like TOOLEMAN did -- but the ABT mods say that's OK.

SO........Of course a "SOURCE ZERO" like that will be allowed. While TOOLEMAN is roasted alive for trying to do something proactive and being up front about what he did.

That is a BULLSHIT rationale on the part of the ABT staff.

Either allow all remasters and shut up about it or ban all remasters including them "SILVER BOOTLEGS".


Stop being hypocrites, ban ALL remasters or allow them all.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Five View Post
Sometimes the master is not stored well and a 1st gen backup will sound better. But most of the time, absolutely.
maybe... I can only speak for myself in this part, as I own a lot of master tapes..........
My masters are kept in a climate controlled environment and sound as crisp and clean as they did directly after they were originally recorded. (My Dave Mason from the Warehouse in 1975 is squeeling, but I don't lose sleep over it, I probably wouldn't listen to it any more any way if it didn't).

I am still amazed at the sonic quality that I got using cassette recorders and reel to reel. As I write this, I'm listening to something I recorded in 1974, recorded from the dead center of the first row in a balcony. I used my shoes and sox to cushion the mics against any 'rumble' and there's nothing on the recording but a clean capture, with a lot of binaural seperation; with headphones turned up as loud as I can take it, I'm back at that show again. This recording is not in circulation, but if it were, the goddam thing would be announced as a bootleg before a week was out. Fleetwood Mac fronted by Bob Welch 11/1/74. And sure as shit, a SILVER BOOTLEG of it would be allowed here in competition with the master tape, no matter what Five says.

(You wanna prove me wrong, Five, then call me and we'll talk about a YES 9/29/72 master..... if you give me your word that a SILVER BOOTLEG of my tape will never be allowed at TTD, then I'll loan you the master tape of this show to work on... You can have this show to debut at TTD and you can ban all other versions of my tape, as NO other copies of this circulate -- because yours will be the FIRST digital mastering directly from the analog tape. You make the definitive and FIRST circulating version -- and there's no need for any other "versions" of this particular and individual recording. And That's a final version. All it needs is a transfer and some smoothing of tape flips. It was made from the exact same seats as the LZ 5/14/73 recording..... on the same recorder as used for the Stones 6/27/72 Mobile.
Jamie, you can also say no and I'll never offer this a 38 year old recording anywhere ever. I don't care if this never circulates, I just want to prove a point, and in the process, we can make a lot of collectors happy. A win-win situation.... and the whiners can come to you to complain -- or they can go to TOOLEMAN's complaint department, Helen Waite.)

By the way, Five, how many shows that I sent you are you still sitting on?
A Stones from 1975, Faces 1973....... anything else?

You decide you wanna share them, call me -- you have my number or get it from 1zeppelin2 -- and we'll discuss lineage. I'll give you just enough to piss off Hurricane and the Jelly-boy. Let's see them whine at you for a while, OK?











And by the way, I dislike REmasters altogether.

Use your own tone controls and equalizers for playback ONLY.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by jameskg View Post
I don't think I troll anyone, other than freezer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by U2Lynne View Post
You wall-eyed apple-knocking pig-fuckers! You don't know shit!
  #117  
Old 2010-11-24, 01:45 AM
Lucifer burns's Avatar
Lucifer burns Lucifer burns is offline
308.26 GB/650.40 GB/2.11
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Dayton, Ohio, U.S.A.
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freezer View Post
Already did that, wasted my time trying to communicate seriously with you.

And that's no bullshit, Billy.







Five, you were away too long.....


Silver boots are considered source "ZERO" at this site and can and will be allowed, even to the point of competing with - in your own terminology- the best available source... the unaltered original source......That's why I've been laughing at all this foolish nonsense.




This is a hobby, nothing else. I made recordings at concerts as a part of MY hobby.

Many of you do the same, cool.

Many of you don't. Those that don't have to take what's offered and that's it.



IF that TOOLEMAN abomination/remaster had been first introduced to the TTD customers as a "SILVER BOOTLEG" there would be certain TTD ABT mods absolutely defending the decision to allow it at TTD.

Hell, Hurricane Billy Bob would be tumbling ass over elbows while running to defend it......period.


Like it or not, by allowing "SILVER BOOTLEGS" as stated policy at TTD, the policy is actually allowing bad remasters... fuck, let's say it properly, encouraging bad remasters to proliferate. As bad or worse than what TOOLEMAN did...and these "SILVER BOOTLEGS" allowed without any description or lineage as to the remastering devices used.

None of us have any idea what a bootlegger does to remaster his garbage product, yet TTD's policy is to allow them so nobody has to buy the bootleggers' wares.

OK, cool........understood.



TOOLEMAN gave something away freely, and honestly said UP FRONT what he did about marking the recording so each and every downloader could make their own decisions about this remaster. Well, shit-fire, let's punish him and rip him a new one in the process for this. Even though nobody was forced to suck it down.

NOBODY had to take it, and some collectors in that thread were thanking TOOLEMAN.... the whiners missed that.

Empress Valley or C&D or Godfather or whoever your favorite flavor of bootlegger is, well, TTD will allow their pisspoor remasters -- and the BootBoys give NO details like TOOLEMAN did -- but the ABT mods say that's OK.

SO........Of course a "SOURCE ZERO" like that will be allowed. While TOOLEMAN is roasted alive for trying to do something proactive and being up front about what he did.

That is a BULLSHIT rationale on the part of the ABT staff.

Either allow all remasters and shut up about it or ban all remasters including them "SILVER BOOTLEGS".


Stop being hypocrites, ban ALL remasters or allow them all.






maybe... I can only speak for myself in this part, as I own a lot of master tapes..........
My masters are kept in a climate controlled environment and sound as crisp and clean as they did directly after they were originally recorded. (My Dave Mason from the Warehouse in 1975 is squeeling, but I don't lose sleep over it, I probably wouldn't listen to it any more any way if it didn't).

I am still amazed at the sonic quality that I got using cassette recorders and reel to reel. As I write this, I'm listening to something I recorded in 1974, recorded from the dead center of the first row in a balcony. I used my shoes and sox to cushion the mics against any 'rumble' and there's nothing on the recording but a clean capture, with a lot of binaural seperation; with headphones turned up as loud as I can take it, I'm back at that show again. This recording is not in circulation, but if it were, the goddam thing would be announced as a bootleg before a week was out. Fleetwood Mac fronted by Bob Welch 11/1/74. And sure as shit, a SILVER BOOTLEG of it would be allowed here in competition with the master tape, no matter what Five says.

(You wanna prove me wrong, Five, then call me and we'll talk about a YES 9/29/72 master..... if you give me your word that a SILVER BOOTLEG of my tape will never be allowed at TTD, then I'll loan you the master tape of this show to work on... You can have this show to debut at TTD and you can ban all other versions of my tape, as NO other copies of this circulate -- because yours will be the FIRST digital mastering directly from the analog tape. You make the definitive and FIRST circulating version -- and there's no need for any other "versions" of this particular and individual recording. And That's a final version. All it needs is a transfer and some smoothing of tape flips. It was made from the exact same seats as the LZ 5/14/73 recording..... on the same recorder as used for the Stones 6/27/72 Mobile.
Jamie, you can also say no and I'll never offer this a 38 year old recording anywhere ever. I don't care if this never circulates, I just want to prove a point, and in the process, we can make a lot of collectors happy. A win-win situation.... and the whiners can come to you to complain -- or they can go to TOOLEMAN's complaint department, Helen Waite.)

By the way, Five, how many shows that I sent you are you still sitting on?
A Stones from 1975, Faces 1973....... anything else?

You decide you wanna share them, call me -- you have my number or get it from 1zeppelin2 -- and we'll discuss lineage. I'll give you just enough to piss off Hurricane and the Jelly-boy. Let's see them whine at you for a while, OK?











And by the way, I dislike REmasters altogether.

Use your own tone controls and equalizers for playback ONLY.


Well "Freezer" is completely right in the first half of this.
And WOW what an offer he has made in the 2nd half.
Hope this happen and thanks to "Freezer" and all involved if and when it finally ever does.
  #118  
Old 2010-11-24, 11:36 AM
dcbullet's Avatar
dcbullet dcbullet is offline
Anti-Temperance League
TTD Staff
68.39 GB/422.37 GB/6.18
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San Diego, CA
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by freezer View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcbullet View Post
Please report them.
Already did that, wasted my time trying to communicate seriously with you.

And that's no bullshit, Billy.
Bullshit.
  #119  
Old 2010-11-24, 12:25 PM
freezer's Avatar
freezer freezer is offline
TTD VIP
0.00 KB/0.00 KB/---
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in your worst nightmare
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcbullet View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by freezer View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcbullet View Post
Please report them.
Already did that, wasted my time trying to communicate seriously with you.

And that's no bullshit, Billy.
Bullshit.
No bullshit, Billy.

Trying to communicate seriously with you is a waste of time.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by jameskg View Post
I don't think I troll anyone, other than freezer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by U2Lynne View Post
You wall-eyed apple-knocking pig-fuckers! You don't know shit!
  #120  
Old 2010-11-24, 12:34 PM
paddington's Avatar
paddington paddington is offline
please look after this bear
TTD Staff
83.17 GB/882.10 GB/10.61
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Re: Can 'audio watermarks' be banned...?

Freezer, it seems like you are unhappy being at TTD.
__________________
"There are some of these recordings where it is just a whirring, and you cannot hear the music. " - Jimmy Page, 2007 / JUL / 26
Closed Thread

The Traders' Den > Where we go to learn ..... > Site Announcements & Suggestions


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forums


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:58 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - , TheTradersDen.org - All Rights Reserved - Hosted at QuickPacket
no new posts