Library Music Themes
General Sharing & Discussion => Requests => Topic started by: fetita1979 on November 29, 2025, 03:04:01 PM
-
Hi,
If someone has De Wolfe DWLP 3200 flac please share. All version i found are without track 1.
Thanks.
-
My copy has track 1 (Stonehenge by Soft Slipper) but it appears to be a lossy file masquerading as a FLAC which is probably why it is missing in those versions you have found.
-
Here's my copy of track 1 - Stonehenge. It is not lossy, as you can see in my screenshot from Audition
(https://i.imgur.com/asbXF80.png) (https://i.imgur.com/zpllulV.png)
BUT here's the catch. It is not a 16bit/44.1kHz flac file. It instead is a 24bit/32kHz flac file, making the maximum frequency per channel 16kHz instead of 22 like normal. This is reduced frequency range, not a lossy file
https://i.imgur.com/mOSk8Kg.png
pixeldrain.com/u/5v7QJEr8
-
BUT here's the catch. It is not a 16bit/44.1kHz flac file. It instead is a 24bit/32kHz flac file, making the maximum frequency per channel 16kHz instead of 22 like normal. This is reduced frequency range, not a lossy file
Thank you for the explanation BWP but I fear it has only helped to confuse me still further. If one takes a lossy file whose frequency range is, by nature, clipped at 16kHz and converts it to FLAC at 24bit/32kHz wouldn't it show the same result? The claim that this is a "reduced frequency range" could surely apply to any upscaled MP3 file? Visually it looks the same and the sampling rate/bit depth can always be manipulated via eg Audacity. So what is it I'm missing here?
-
So what is it I'm missing here?
Ignore everything I said before. You are correct in your assumptions. It COULD be legit a shit rip, but likely subterfuge is at play here.
I figured before I get all haughty I'd give it a try. A UPM download I have not tagged yet, IMLP1_Big Band Beat - 01 - Double Twelve.flac. Took a screenshot from Audition at full 16/48 then converted it to 128k mp3 and then resampled that to 24/32 and viola it looks like the file I shared earlier.
Results:
https://imgur.com/a/t6mvj5o
-
Here's one I recorded July 22 | pixeldrain.com/u/FZd6MnE5
If no good I can do again
-
Many thanks guys!
-
Here's one I recorded July 22 | pixeldrain.com/u/FZd6MnE5
If no good I can do again
That's the same file I shared. The lossy 32khz one.
-
Ignore everything I said before. You are correct in your assumptions. It COULD be legit a shit rip, but likely subterfuge is at play here.
Well, if the file Retro shared is from a rip of his album then it would appear that both his and your shares are genuine FLACs. It just seems odd that when viewed on the spectrum analyzer Track 1 gives a very different result to all the other tracks on the album in that the others show a full range of frequencies whereas Track 1 seems to be limited to 16kHz. Track 1 also sounds compressed when compared to the other tracks.
I wonder, then, if Retro wouldn't mind re-ripping just Track 1 so we can get a definitive decision on this, please.
-
Can do
-
I did the whole LP for consistency
pixeldrain.com/u/SMHcWS7L
-
Thank you Retro for taking the time today to rip this one. Track 1 is now definitely a FLAC, properly displays as one in a spectrum analyser and doesn't sound so compressed. To paraphrase, if it looks like a FLAC and sounds like a FLAC then it probably is a FLAC! So as for the earlier version it is, without doubt, an upscaled ie fake FLAC. And with that, m'lord I rest my case!
One small point Track 14 Crazy House is incorrectly tagged as Track 13 Me And The Wind And The Plain (Vocal). But easily remedied.
-
I did the whole LP for consistency
pixeldrain.com/u/SMHcWS7L
Thank you, Retro!
-
Nice from you Retro. Thanks.