Library Music Themes
General Sharing & Discussion => Requests => Topic started by: kosmiksoul on January 13, 2023, 09:36:22 AM
-
Hello Librarians!
Sonoton remastered some releases in 2022, so it would be awesome to get the ones by Claude Larson.
These are the ones I'm looking for but any other will be welcome:
SONV 146 - Scenic Sequences
SONV 169 - Scenes and Images vol. 1
SONV 170 - Scenes and Images vol. 2
SONV 192 - Plantlife
SONV 227 - Soundscapes vol. 1
SONV 247 - Soundscapes vol. 2
h--ps://www.sonoton.com/en/search/?search=claude%20larson
Peace & Love
:·)
-
I can help you. Downloading these albums is a snap of my fingers.
The difficulty is Uploading them to the web is rather lengthy.
SONV 146 htXXs://mega.nz/file/dLdFTJYR#XrI5sNPqW7sSC_in-cGjZESrnyM_uRfsKR0I7E1ZyQ4
SONV 169 htXXs://mega.nz/file/EHchhDxA#1dgumB28Ko3ynpYXJUQ4dgFMV-BCUQIu87krm7nLuK0
SONV 170 htXXs://mega.nz/file/VS90jbDC#5-IUn0pbD7CcUw4YlE3Wi9JnKz7vXP3RO4Zy4p695QE
SONV 192 htXXs://mega.nz/file/ZDFXyYSQ#73B7qAded780rxf6WUo9YU7i_XIRfXpTEKjV-GTApWI
SONV 227 htXXs://mega.nz/file/kSsViTTY#cyGFuR2knxUHyPnz3yFBkAmowOuFII0i1RZEptfR7k0
SONV 247 htXXs://mega.nz/file/JKs1jabR#dYIlBuWq49l-VepPtZXLQUS9p-JLMyrmb8znJ0LKD-g
-
I can help you. Downloading these albums is a snap of my fingers.
The difficulty is Uploading them to the web is rather lengthy.
I concur wholeheartedly. Uploading files, (particularly those over 500Mb), takes quite a while to do. The servers on the file-sharing sites have to cope with a lot. Which is why I don't expect immediate responses to requests. It's nice when it happens, (of course), but I don't expect/demand it. You're doing us all proud, matey! ;D
-
Thanks for the upgrade!
greetings
Dyo
Aussieland
-
I can help you. Downloading these albums is a snap of my fingers.
The difficulty is Uploading them to the web is rather lengthy.
I concur wholeheartedly. Uploading files, (particularly those over 500Mb), takes quite a while to do. The servers on the file-sharing sites have to cope with a lot. Which is why I don't expect immediate responses to requests. It's nice when it happens, (of course), but I don't expect/demand it. You're doing us all proud, matey! ;D
Agreed. Thanks for your generous shares, ChunYinZi.
-
Only by converting those wavs to flacs would make those 800MB files a lot smaller => 400MB. Which means half of the time for uploading and downloading.
But that, for the sharer, would mean to unzip APM's files, convert them to flac, and re-zip them.
Too much work??
-
Only by converting those wavs to flacs would make those 800MB files a lot smaller => 400MB. Which means half of the time for uploading and downloading.
But that, for the sharer, would mean to unzip APM's files, convert them to flac, and re-zip them.
Too much work??
About this issue
I have two answers
1 I am a firm WAVist and I always think that WAV is the best sound quality in lossless
2 convert WAV to FLAC will make its sound quality loss because I do not have a special software, strictly speaking, you need to adjust the parameters of the output FLAC to be better
To sum up, I always share WAV
-
Ok. Your choice Chun.
-
About this issue
I have two answers
1 I am a firm WAVist and I always think that WAV is the best sound quality in lossless
2 convert WAV to FLAC will make its sound quality loss because I do not have a special software, strictly speaking, you need to adjust the parameters of the output FLAC to be better
To sum up, I always share WAV
This raises an interesting point for me. WAV files are undoubtedly lossless. But I have read elsewhere on the web that sound quality is reduced when a file is converted to FLAC or Apple Lossless (M4A). But is that right? Both of these formats are also designated lossless and my understanding is that one could convert between these formats over and over without loss of sound quality. As I have an iMac I convert all the FLAC shares to ALAC (Apple Lossless) using XLD before adding them to my Apple Music app (formerly iTunes). My interpretation of Spek output suggests that there is no loss of quality after conversion. Or have I got this wrong?
-
This has been discussed so many times in the past.
And it's been proved that there is no loss of a single bit of informations in converting WAV (or AIFF) to FLAC (or ALAC, APE ecc.). And back, over and over.
-
This has been discussed so many times in the past.
And it's been proved that there is no loss of a single bit of informations in converting WAV (or AIFF) to FLAC (or ALAC, APE ecc.). And back, over and over.
I'll finish by saying what I think about this matter
Change is definitely there, but very small
Ordinary people can not hear the difference
Unless you use very good equipment and a good pair of ears
But both are also lossless music, certainly better than MP3
All the music I'm sharing is WAV, and forum friends can convert it themselves if you like.
Thank you!
-
I think a lot of it depends on the bitrate by which the WAV files are saved in. Generally, they're 48000Hz with a format of 16 bits. However, this can vary with some being 44100Hz and some being 24 bits. When converting to FLAC, it's always better to match the bitrate and format to the original files, if not there's a danger of losing some information, no matter how small, as a result. I've converted many to FLAC and have never noticed any drop in sound quality. But then, that's just my ears! ;)
-
When converting to FLAC, it's always better to match the bitrate and format to the original files, if not there's a danger of losing some information, no matter how small, as a result.
Exactly.
That's why many softwares don't let you choose bitrate and format, but just keep the same ones when converting to flac.
Converting 16/44.1 wav to 16/44.1 flac doesn't make you lose anything.
Or 16/48 to 16/48, or 24/48 to 24/48 and so on.
The differences audible through the listening experience Chun is referring to, is real, but it is caused by the player.
Many players do not have the chance to reproduce the flacs, and others do but just converting on-the-go to wav, obtaining non-optimal results.
That's why for the listening (or editing) it is always advisable to use uncompressed formats as WAV or AIFF directly.
This doesn't mean that by converting WAV to FLAC or viceversa you get loss of data, but only that reproducing compressed formats (even if lossless) is not as good as reproducing uncompressed formats.
Lossless compression is useful for storage or sharing matters, and less for listening.
Even burning audio CD's (not data) using FLACs, makes your burning software to convert the FLACs to WAVs before burning.
-
Quoting myself cause going back to read the thread I realized my expression might have looked aggressive, but my intentions weren't belligerent..
I was just meaning it's not a great sacrifice, if one considers the benefits.
Too much work??
-
Quoting myself cause going back to read the thread I realized my expression might have looked aggressive, but my intentions weren't belligerent..
I was just meaning it's not a great sacrifice, if one considers the benefits.
Too much work??
i think it's more the amount of time it takes to upload files to file sharing sites that becomes laborious. It's amazing how time can fly by when uploading files.
-
To be honest, when Chun and others have shared WAV files in the past. I've edited them by tidying up the track names, titles, artists, year, genres etc and even add a picture and then save as a FLAC.
-
Thank you so much!
I also prefer FLAC to WAV, but it's ok.
If it's so easy to get the tracks from the sites, it would be great to know how to do it.
For me it's enough to be able to download high quality mp3.
There are many things waiting to be downloaded.
Have a great weekend!
-
unfortunately links are dead. Could someone kindly re-up? thanks in advance
-
Hi OG, here are the 6 X Sonoton shared by ChunYinZi
WAV: pixeldr@in.com/u/JuWowhd2
Thanks to him ;D
-
A big thank You and thanks ChunYinZi
-
About this issue
I have two answers
1 I am a firm WAVist and I always think that WAV is the best sound quality in lossless
2 convert WAV to FLAC will make its sound quality loss because I do not have a special software, strictly speaking, you need to adjust the parameters of the output FLAC to be better
To sum up, I always share WAV
... WAV files are undoubtedly lossless. ...
That is actually untrue. WAV is a container format that can hold all sorts of encodings, including, for example, MP3.
The WAV superstition will not die it seems. Amazing.
-
I'm not sure I follow. I was referring to the format rather than the quality of the content. The WAV =format= is lossless. If you are saying that it is possible to incorporate poor quality audio into a WAV file then I agree. But then we're back to the original issue of lossy files masquerading as FLACs or whatever. At the end of the day the quality of the sound is only as good as the recorded source. Rubbish in rubbish out.
-
... The WAV =format= is lossless. If you are saying that it is possible to incorporate poor quality audio into a WAV file then I agree. But then we're back to the original issue of lossy files masquerading as FLACs ...
No, I wasn't referring to sound quality or transcoded MP3.
The WAV file format is neither lossless nor lossy. Stop thinking about WAV as an audio encoding.
Let me reiterate to be clear: WAV -- as opposed to FLAC, MP3, PCM or Vorbis -- is not an encoding. It is a container for encoded data. PCM is most frequently to be found inside a WAV file, but you can put MP3-encoded data into it as well, and directly, not as a transcode. If you unpack such a WAV file you'll get an MP3 file, because that's the actual content of the WAV file in this case.
To cite the pertinent Wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WAV#Comparison_of_coding_schemes): "Audio in WAV files can be encoded in a variety of audio coding formats, such as GSM or MP3, to reduce the file size."
-
By the way, as a general remark about these Larson releases (thanks for the up and reup!):
The metadata comments state "Authentic vintage vinyl recording", so -- if I understand the claim correctly -- these files have apparently been ripped from vinyl by APM. They were not produced from master tapes. Isn't that curious?
-
I realise we all appear to be trying to achieve perfection in these and other recordings on LMT but at the end of the day it comes down to whether we enjoy what we are listening to be it FLAC, WAV or MP3.
-
The metadata comments state "Authentic vintage vinyl recording", so -- if I understand the claim correctly -- these files have apparently been ripped from vinyl by APM. They were not produced from master tapes. Isn't that curious?
That would make no sense for remasters. Looking at the Sonoton web site, one sees … e.g. for "Plantlife":
"Authentic digital vintage stereo recordings, previously released in the legendary SONOTON Vinyl LP Series (1981); plus newly remastered versions (2021)."
The album listing shows two sequences of tracks. The first sequence contains remastered versions. The second sequence contains the "authentic vintage vinyl recording."
https://www.sonoton.com/en/album/SONV0192
-
Would it be possible to re upload SONV 247 - Soundscapes vol. 2? Thanks in advance!
-
Here is 247
pixeldrain.com/u/PGqW7yaZ
-
Here is 247
pixeldrain.com/u/PGqW7yaZ
Thanks Mr Tate
-
Would it be possible to re upload SONV 227 - Soundscapes vol. 1? Thanks in advance! :)
-
Would it be possible to re upload SONV 227 - Soundscapes vol. 1? Thanks in advance! :)
htXXs://mega.nz/file/hHlzGAZL#9IbO-ALjUVbQspDqBP5vpGXoIXYe6TZSjNkfJyXowNI
-
Thank you so much! :)
-
Hi. I was wondering if anyone has the albums:
Saka Mazouki And His Kwela Band 1987 – African Fascination(Claude Larson)
Claude Larson 1994 – Taula
-
Would it be possible to re upload SONV 227 - Soundscapes vol. 1? Thanks in advance! :)
htXXs://mega.nz/file/hHlzGAZL#9IbO-ALjUVbQspDqBP5vpGXoIXYe6TZSjNkfJyXowNI
Thanks for sharing!
-
Bit of a necro, but can anyone reupload Soundscapes Vol. 1?
Edit: Thank you Chun!
-
Bit of a necro, but can anyone reupload Soundscapes Vol. 1?
htXXs://mega.nz/file/JP9GWKSa#mlvBzUQqIuUpW2fsi5jQFg7Jpco1oC3eCXsbOaEmi_I