.jpg)
Red Smiley and the Tennessee Cutups
Valley View Park
Hallam, PA
5-30-1965
Johnny Palmer - Bass
Bobby Lester - Fiddle
Dave Deese - Banjo
Gene Burrows - Guitar
George Wynn - Mandolin
01 - Intro
02 - Love Please Come Home
03 - Banjolina
04 - Look Over Your Shoulder
05 - Swinging A Nine Pound Hammer
06 - Rawhide
07 - The Race Is On
08 - Sweetharts In Heaven
09 - Uncle Pen
10 - I've Got A Tiger By The Tail
11 - Black Mountain Rag
12 - I'm Using My Bible For A
13 - Jesus Savior, I Love Thee
14 - I Know You're Married But I Love You Still
15 - Lady Of Spain
16 - Mighty Dark To Travel
17 - Some Old Day
18 - The Didn't Know The Difference, But I Did
19 - ?
20 - Grandpa Played The Fiddle
Grabbed on the web
12 commentaires:
This material was originally posted on bt.etree.org at this address:
http://bt.etree.org/details.php?torrentId=568016
It was first offered there on November 3, 2013.
The files were originally FLAC, lossless audio.
The original FLAC files were about 210 MB in size.
The original info sheet contained the statement:
"I have not made any editing changes to what I extracted from CD."
Uncle Gil has taken this material and converted it to MP3, lossy audio.
He has thereby reduced the total size to only 69 MB.
He has thereby removed about 141 MBs of data from the original files.
So, for every MB of data he presents, there are two MBs of data that are missing.
Uncle Gil has also combined all the separate files into one long MP3 file with no CUE sheet for tracking.
The result is a poor and needlessly inferior product.
And, for a savings of what?
A little over 140 MB of disc space?
At the cost of the quality of the original?
And why?
It is material that is in the public domain.
It is not copy protected at all.
But sadly, this material was not protected from the mishandling and misrepresentation by the schlockmeister Uncle Gil.
At least he had the minimal decency to remove the "no editing" statement from the original info sheet that he copied.
Thank you Jane for this comment. UG simply sucks. I still wonder why he has so many followers. It seems, most of those who visit this blog do not care about quality, just about file size. The smaller the better. My hearing is still good, that`s why I prefer lossless files, even though it takes 20 more seconds to download them. Have a blessed day ...
@ Jane
You're wrong. These files were downloaded at Sugarmegs (who offer .wma or .mp3 only) more than ten years ago.
It is possible that bt.etree has reencoded the original files to satisfy "audiophiles" like you.
Think before talking!
@ "Golden ears Jane" :
Fifteen years ago I burned many CD-Rs from .wma or .ogg and .mp3 files. If I rip them, today, in .flac or even .wav, what real quality do I get? Do you have the answer?
- First, bt.etree.org does not re-encode files to satisfy "audiophiles," a term you put in quotes to emphasize your contempt.
bt.etree.org directs its uploaders as follows:
"Do not start with source material from lossy compression such as mp3, mp4, or aac. It has already lost some frequencies that cannot be regained. Instead, track down the original .wav source from which the .mp3s were made. You might want to do a little SourceAnalysis on a couple sample tracks of a show to see if what you see is consistent with the type of source you're supposed to have; and to see if the transfer was done properly."
- Second, when you extract data from a CD, you don't get an info sheet.
But, when you download from bt.etree.org, you get an info sheet with the download.
This material was uploaded by a user named "cheeseincident" to bt.etree.org
This user would have created the original info sheet.
Your info *just happens to be an almost exact copy* of the info sheet from bt.etree.org
The only differences in your info sheet is:
a. you added a "?" instead of a blank space for track 20
b. you added a "0" at the front of track numbers "1-9"
c. you used a dash instead of a decimal after each track number
d. you corrected some typos in the song titles
e. you corrected the title to track 11
f. you deleted the statement "I have not made any editing changes to what I extracted from CD."
g. you moved the list of musicians to the top, but its otherwise identical.
So, the evidence is you obtained the info sheet from bt.etree.org and modified it.
You even repeat the exact text at the end:
"CD extraction via EAC
Unknown taper"
- Third, although you say that the reason you present this material in MP3 format is because you obtained it in a lossy format, your stated reason is obviously NOT the true reason you present this material in MP3 format.
The fact is that you present ALL material in this format, even the vinyl albums that you say you rip from your vinyl.
You most certainly do not rip your vinyl directly to MP3. Nobody would do that.
* You either convert everything to MP3 because you are a stingy schlockmeister, or it’s because you actually obtain your material in a lossy format and then misrepresent the material as your own vinyl rips. *
Furthermore, you combined ALL of these individual files from "Grandpa Played the Fiddle" into one single MP3 file.
You either went out of your way to degrade this material sufficiently for your personal purposes before presenting it, or you just lied about where it came from.
You display personal contempt for "audiophiles," even using the term in sneering quotation marks.
Audiophiles are just people who care about high-fidelity sound reproduction.
But, you display active contempt for high-fidelity sound reproduction.
You falsely claim your focus is to "preserve from oblivion these wonderful objects of the past." It’s an obviously false statement.
If it were true, why would you use a lossy format on lossless material that is in the public domain or that isn’t being claimed as copy protected?
You should at least have the decency to delete that false statement from your blog and replace it with an admission “I do not care at all about the quality of my material.” Or, even “I have active contempt for audiophiles.”
Jane (?!), You have a fertile imagination. I let you think what you want. When you demonstrate to me that you have shared the rip of more than three thousand vinyl records belonging to you, scanned the covers and labels, collaborated on countless compilations in the company of collectors and music lovers around the world, I will have some sympathy towards a character like you who doesn't want to hear anything but himself and who spends more time analyzing files than listening to music.
Glad to have allowed you to express yourself. You must be quite alone in real life.
By the way, go check out SugarMegs anyway.
And... I'm sorry for being just a French asshole (as the brave Anonym says) and for expressing myself so badly in English.
I have merely presented the evidence that you either:
(a) convert your material to MP3 format because you are a mingy schlockmeister, or
(b) present your material in MP3 format because you actually obtain your material in a lossy format from some inferior source and then misrepresent it.
Your apparent response is that you "(a) convert your material to MP3 format because you are a mingy schlockmeister" and you apologize for being a "French asshole" which is a derogatory name I never called you.
To the contrary of your assertion, I do not care to hear myself or spend time analyzing files rather than listening to music.
I use my ears to listen to music, and what you present here on this blog is a lousy, lossy, needlessly inferior product, not worth listening to.
Your blog is fraudulent, but I do find that fact and your incoherent defense of it to be interesting.
Given the torrent that the Jane creature refers to hasn't had any activity on it for nearly three years and has no seeders (therefore is impossible to download), it would seem to make the whole of her meltdown and that of the anonymous creature backing her up utterly irrelevant, even if there were any veracity to it (which I doubt) because the only alternative to Uncle Gil's offering (if one hasn't sourced it earlier or from a different source) is silence.
Furthermore, given its a) a live performance b) it was recorded 57 years ago c) its bluegrass not a major classical piece d) its recorded on some non descript CD not Decca direct cut vinyl its a bit rich banging about the quality. If anything Flac would highlight more imperfections in the sound than less but still audio snobs have to be audio snobs. After all how else can they impress the neighbours?
Keep doing what your doing Uncle Gil. Its much appreciated. Just leave the trolls to go do disgusting unnatural things to themselves at someone else's expense. Just don't feed them!
Phantom of the Rock Opera, Silence would be better than this recording. It sounds horrible. Delete! Delete! Delete!
Pourquoi tu ne vires pas les commentaires stupides de haters anonymes qui n'apportent rien a la discussion ?
@ Torquemada:
merci pour ton commentaire... J'écrirais au Ministère des Affaires Sociales.
Quant à laisser quelque temps encore les commentaires ci-dessus, c'est parce que je crois, encore, que l'on peut tirer quelque chose du dialogue.... même si il s'agit souvent de méchanceté gratuite... Jalousie et(ou) stupidité ?
Enregistrer un commentaire