A Big Request...

[mitchellmichael]

So from what we have downloaded here, Is it V29 - 38 which are lesser quality than v1 - 28?

That's the general impression I get. Although, I don't think its been confirmed that every volume after 29 is lossy. Or that the first 28 volumes are in fact lossless. FWIW, I ran my copy (which is from the BZ 2018 share) through Lossless Audio Checker:
https://losslessaudiochecker.com/
Results (304 files):
91 Clean
4 Transcoded
209 Upsampled
Note, I don't think the algorithm is foolproof but manually checking 304 files would be a huge effort.

So since 209 are upsampled that means they were lossy and converted to FLAC?

[Track06]

lossy
A rolls ｜Volumes
058-065｜08
134-148｜16-17
416-431｜20-21
000452*｜24
504-566｜31-38
*short part?

Determined by eyes/brain using Spek – Free Acoustic Spectrum Analyzer / Spectrogram Viewer.

More answers or more questions?

[mitchellmichael]

lossy
A roles ｜Volumes
058-065｜08
134-148｜16-17
416-431｜20-21
000452*｜24
504-566｜31-38
*short part?

Determined by eyes/brain using Spek – Free Acoustic Spectrum Analyzer / Spectrogram Viewer.

More answers or more questions?

I don't know what any of that means

[r9453]

So since 209 are upsampled that means they were lossy and converted to FLAC?

From the Lossless Audio Checker website:
Unsampled = increasing the sampling rate
Transcoded = from a lossy to a lossless format

[Track06]

Volumes 08, 16, 17, 20, 21, 31-38 are lossy.
Equals rolls 58-65A, 134-148A, 416-431A, 504A-566.
Maybe also a short part of 452A.


Lossless Audio Checker is obviously quite wrong. 209 are upsampled? From what? 43.9kHz? The higher frequencies are there (somewhat limited also in the lossy files).
Using Spek you can reliably identify files transcoded from a lossy format in a second (if you know how they look like).

[r9453]

More answers or more questions?

Thanks for the info. I never knew about Spek so I grabbed it. More answers or more questions? Both, I guess. At least now we know where we are at with regard to which CDs are lossy and which are not. Its worth noting that the lossiness matches the CD pairs (volumes). Except for 01-Nagra Tape Roll 452A which appears to have a 3:00 section patched in.

01-Nagra Tape Roll 452A:

[Megazeti]

What a messy thread with so many twists and turns but enjoyable reading the developing info that turns up and following the plot just barely

[Much2Much]

“Are we nearly there yet?” as my grand daughter says.
From the recent paragraphs can I assume that we are closer than we were a week ago to identifying the best sources of the DBD material? There has been some excellent expert knowledge brought to bear on this subject, it’s very impressive. Has it been established, so far, which of the DBD discs are error free and from a lossless source.

[yymca6]

here's 27, 28 and 30 as requested

hxxps://we.tl/t-4D5Lmqvbj9

Would you mind uploading your older version of the complete set? Even if you have to break it out over a few days or a week or a month?

I'll upload a few each day. I'll start with Vol 1

I see that you have not started to re-upload the whole series would it be possible for you to start by re-uploading volumes 16, 17, 20, 21, 24 (part of roll 452A) and 31-38 who are described as lossy?

Thanks!

[Track06]

Mrbeatleg's share equals the main source for A/B Road (something like ((Aleft + Aright)/2 - B = 0). That alone makes it important to me.
These are likely from minidiscs...

So probably technically lossy, I would love to have Mrbeatleg's rips because of the integrity of the set. I don't see any improvement in incorporating some of Mrbeatleg's into the old set, but some hodge podge potentially creating more headache.