Originally posted by Remy:Maybe we should then just end that debate for now, in this topic. It's pointless anyway. Just get back on topic, discussing the recordings, or not and just enjoy them, or not
Originally posted by BigGiRL:[..]
Well, there actually is!
Originally posted by karlheinzu2:[..]
[F]unny & quite enjoyable discussion - at least the grass is undoubtful greener on our side, that'll be a matter of fact. But anyway enjoy your passion....
Originally posted by LSMelo:[..]
Can we have it in lossless?
Originally posted by BigGiRL:[..]
This might be a good moment to express once more the intentions of the BigGiRL ‘i+e’ bootleg-corner because people might have the wrong impression of what is going on here. Most importantly, this place is not about being more “green” than anywhere else.
Rather, it’s about a specific kind of “bootleg” - which is essentially a sobriquet for an unofficial live recording and, in the case of U2, allowed as long as that recording is not used with the intention of making a profit.* A specific kind of “bootleg,” typically featuring alternate, or – with a more “esoteric” word – subaltern content. With which I mean that these bootlegs almost in principle do not feature the best recordings, but rather those recordings that needed a little help to be enjoyed “as much as possible,” or those recordings that have a value beyond “listening enjoyment.”
A good example of this latter category are the so-called mixlr-recordings of which there are currently no other recordings available. These recordings may have a symbolic and emotional value for those who went to that particular show. It might even be argued that those mixlr-recordings also have a historic value, either to check what was said and/or played, or as future “relic-of-the-past.”
The idea behind the remastered alternate recordings is basically that, in general, the “prime” recordings don’t need remastering. And what I mean with “remastering” is basically “equalization” (in short, the modification of bass, treble and mid-range) and volume adjustment. Nothing fancy.
I do, however, use quite often a simple compression tool and sometimes also a generic noise reduction tool and, yes, all this could be dome in a million different ways and with different programs, but I do work with my tools as I know how to apply them. At least for now this is the case.
In sum: do not expect to find the best recordings of the ‘i+e” tour in this “bootleg-corner,” and do not expect merely lossless – but do not expect merely lossy either!
What you can expect is that I intend to respect the tapers wishes, that I try to be honest and open about everything I do, and, last but not least, that sharing a passion for U2 live music is all that matters.
User karlheinzu2 is right that the grass is greener on “his” side: the BigGiRL ‘i+e’ bootleg-corner is intentionally the “other” side (with a "d"!). With different leaves, colours, shades and sounds. It’s for anyone to decide for themselves whether they prefer to be in, or outside the box – or even to be on both sides!
Complaining, however, that this is the “other” side and not the “one” side, is not only pointless but also a display of a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the BigGiRL ‘i+e’ bootleg-corner (and dichotomies in general).
And to all the happy and loyal visitors of this thread, I can only say one thing: the BigGiRL ‘i+e’ bootleg-corner is here to stay!
__________________________________________________
* see, 'How does U2 feel about bootlegs?'; see also, 'copyright on show recordings'
Originally posted by blueeyedboy:Well said, although I'm sorry that you have to consistently explain this! [...]
Originally posted by olli66:I don't know the original source but the Berlin 4 remaster sounds so shrill. I wish the original source would be shared. Knowing thefly's recordings I am sure it won't be too bad.
Originally posted by BigGiRL:[..]
The original recording is shared on u2torrents and dime.