Being Nit Picky about these downloads

[Buzzetta]

I know it is not a crucial issue but it definitely helps on the downloading of boots.

Please let us know the rating of the audio quality of the boot. What is the grade you would give? Do you know if it an FM broadcast ? What is the bitrate recording?

Reasons this is helpful

1 - The icons distinguishing between audio and video is great. This is an additional improvement when it comes to downloading files.

2 - Most of us probably do not have elite unlimited accounts with the hosting sites of these files. We would probably like to have a better idea of what we are downloading so we can get the best immediately instead of downloading a show to hear a muffled sound and then having to wait a an hour and a half to download another.

3 - For clarification purposes. Personally, I will take a 128kbps FM Broadcast Show over Lossless Audience show with people screaming next to the mic and a low sounding muffled Morrissey (or any other artist).

Just my two cents....

 

[vegan-soldier]

I think this is a pretty good idea. I am grateful for the downloads. there are some here and there that are quite shocking and puzzling....as far as why someone would post them.

 

[Devoted101]

that's true... i love all i can get but i do like to know what's what...

 

[CemetryGates]

I like some detail about the sound too, it always helps even if its just a roundabout grade. I once posted something like this years ago when this site used the old board system and was told to shut my f***ing mouth and be glad anyone shares anything. Apparently I was being to demanding.

 

[Buzzetta]

I am going to bump this one...

Also if people like what they see... say something to keep the post fresh so latecomers can download the show as well.

 

[Smelly French Boy]

I am 100% ok with you for complete the info, I think I did my best.
But, I am not agree about the fm vs the audience recording.
I recently post the glasgow concert of The Smiths(1985), and I really think it's much better than the fm ones, like many of the concerts Soundsville recorded.
Just my point of view.

 

[Buzzetta]

INs ome cases.... yes.... but

Broadcast concerts usually offer a "crispness" that is not picked up by the auidience recorder. So no matter how "lossless" a show is... a bad recording is still a bad recording no matter how big the files are.

 

[Smelly French Boy]

Do you have downloaded the glasgow show and compare the quality between the fm ones and this one?
P.S:I don't talk about the difference between mp3 and flac, just about the quality of the recording.

 

[Buzzetta]

Do you have downloaded the glasgow show and compare the quality between the fm ones and this one?
P.S:I don't talk about the difference between mp3 and flac, just about the quality of the recording.

Yes... I downloaded the glasgow show and it is of excellent quality. However the majority of boots are not like that. Glasgow is the exception to the majority of shows as it was supposedly mastered by that Sound Steve guy.

And besides I am agreeing with you that sound quality is preferable over whether it is supposedly lossless or not.

 

[David]

I agree with everything said here. We could use the abbreviations that Passions uses: AU-, AU, AU+, FM, SBD, etc., etc. It would make things far easier. I've downloaded more than a few total shite boots just to delete them the second I hear track one.

 

[Unlikely One]

Its ok to be nit picky but some folk do go an awful long way to help others piece together the Morrissey live history. Many people still are nowhere near 1mb broadband so everything is an effort. Any recordings posted here are unlikely to differ from the descriptions posted on Passions. If they did then I am pretty sure the poster would note this as it could only indicate higher quality really. I think its right to say its important to give as much info as possible but lets not get on the case of the folk who try and share freely.

 

[Dave]

I understand also the idea about ratings. I have downloaded things like, "Nothing To Declare Except My Jeans" that are awful sounding, and only interesting if you have to have everything or were at the show.

However, let's make it the listener's responsibility to past a comment and not just "thanks" or no comment at all. I understand that if you download something that sounds bad you might not want to complain about it, but on the other hand, the people that share are already so outnumbered by the people that only take, that I don't think it's fair to ask them to do any more than they already have. On the other hand, it would be appreciated to get an idea of the sound. I know that a lot of SNS's recordings are posted with comments about the sound quality and it is appreciated.

 

[Buzzetta]

Its ok to be nit picky but some folk do go an awful long way to help others piece together the Morrissey live history. Many people still are nowhere near 1mb broadband so everything is an effort. Any recordings posted here are unlikely to differ from the descriptions posted on Passions. If they did then I am pretty sure the poster would note this as it could only indicate higher quality really. I think its right to say its important to give as much info as possible but lets not get on the case of the folk who try and share freely.

I do not think it takes that much effort. I do it with every download I make available.