Since I will be the "original uploader" in these instances, Here's the question:
How many would prefer for me to copy them as ISOs (disc images) rather than rip them to FLACs?
The advantage to you is that you would actually have the disc copied to be a perfect mirror (1411kbs) - you would then mount your image file on your computer using free programs like Magic Disc At that point you can listen to them or rip from them as usual.
The disadvantage is the extra steps involved.
Also is there a prohibition against distributing them that way?
What I do on this site is fully within the bounderies of the law and downloading them too, is legal as long as you do not go out and sell them. Honestly people. Please don't do this.
Your responses will be tabulated by the world famous "im. b. eciles" and the answers will be available for all to see soon.
Let me know and have a great weekend.
-dave
139 comments:
Disc image would be fine for me. Thank you for your hard work with this blog.
magicpoe
Hi,
Honestly i don't know shit about image disc and never try to really understand, for now my preference is FLAC because i know how use it but the other way is maybe less complicate for the Big job you do everyday, so i would say the ball is on your side !
Thanks for All Anyway
ELVISS77
Iso is the better format. Downloading one file instead of many
would make my day a little easier. I doubt that there are any legal restrictions to this format as long as you don`t sell ISO files. I use the freeware `Image burn` program.
www.imgburn.com
For me, flac is the only way to go.
This way you have the option of burning to CD or storing on a hardrive (and listening to it from the hardrive), which is what I do. Most collectors I know rarely burn to CD anyway. In my experience if people want to listen to their boots more often than not it's to MP3 for their iPod
FLAC
FLAC please.
FLAC or SHN are the standard distribution/share formats for collectors. No reason to change.
Not a fan of ISO.
flac
FLAC always
If it's more Pink Floyd bootlegs, who cares? I won't be downloading them anyway :-)
But seriously, FLAC is the way to go for archival and listening purposes. I haven't burned discs in years.
I would prefer FLAC Files. I have several backup son dvd data. Some of the shows are also burned on audio cds, but that´s up to me, If you upload images we would have to burn in cds without any other choice, and it´s real difficult when you have so many bootlegs laying around. I prefere to backup in dvds as flac for space purpones.
Many thanks for this great site, and sorry for my "chip´n dale" english! Greetings from Argentina!Your hard work is really appreciated!
Flac please
flac
FLAC is good for me.
Yeah FLAC please
FLAC is preferable for me.
Thanks so much for all you do here, in whatever format.
I'll go for FLAC, Dave.
Thank you!
FLAC, no doubt about it.
Flac is better!
Thanks for all you share,
nice weekend.
I really prefer Flac....that's all...thanks for taking time to do all this....
cheers
Michelancero
Your faithful followers here in Mpls find FLAC fantastic, even fenomenal....heh, heh....
FLAC please. Thanks for everything you do...this site is definitely one of the best of its kind out there...
ISO or FLAC can be easily burned onto a disc using Nero or Roxio, which are the most popular programs.
I have a lot of files in both formats, believe me the quality of CD's using ISO is much better.
Why don't you give it a try? and then you come back with your comments to Dave.
Thank you Dave for the music.
FLAC, please. I've never even heard of the other option.
FLAC please. All the best and many thanks for all. Also a nice weekend for you.
FLAC! ISO is too wonky and SHN blows imho; flac gives you the best of all worlds!
I vote FLAC. Thanks!
Think of the .ISO format as a container. It is a container that contains an exact image (or exact copy if you like) of the physical cd that Dave has. The sound quality of the .ISO file will be exactly the same as the physical cd, unless there is an error in the .ISO file creation process. When the .ISO file is downloaded you would then convert that to FLAC or MP3 or whatever you prefer. It would save some time for Dave but add a little work on our parts.
I'm a FLAC man. I rarely write physical CD media now and mostly just listen from hard disc. I guess as long as I can split the audio on the PC with a CUE file or something it would be ok to have a disc image but, personally, I prefer FLAC.
Cheers for all the good audio!
flac
flac for a obvious reason: after download of just one rar file a preview is possible...for me thats very important!
Flac, ISO is a pain and as many have said, it limits what you can do. I prefer to listen to the Flac files and not always burn to CD. Also, when the material is studio tracks and not live, I may well burn only certain songs from many different discs to a cd for listening in the car. So for me,
Flac is much more flexable and easier to work with.
Thanks for all your effors here!
Dave
You do such good work, on your own time and "dime". So to my mind whatever format relives you of "more steps" is good with me. So ISO is fine and I can easily figure how to "back drive" to FLAC. Clearly FLAC is easier for us folks BUT if it means you can focus on other things and/or provide even more "good stuff" then whatever is easier for you .... yet staying with the lossless mantra of course.
Which reminds me. I have some great free bootz of my own, some superb Tull soundboards I have never seen on your site and some Joan Armatrading stuff. How do I get them to you for us all to share??
FLAC !!! No ISO, please. Yours, El Mino, The Sword
ISO is fine for me !.thanks in advance !
Iso is the best format
only iso please,
"demontools lite" will do it best !!!!!
thanks
iso please.
iso is the best way to keep rate as is !!!!
iso , iso , iso .
I would actually prefer the ISO, but I agree with the person who said, use whatever method makes it easier for you.
Thanks so much for all your posts!
FLAC
only flac, please
FLAC
Thanks for asking!
NO IMAGE please,,at these days who cares about CDs.
A well done RIP in EAC at secure mode is all what is needed to have it perfect.
FLACS please.
yours truly,
goa
Put me down for a FLAC!!!!
Cheers daniel
FLAC, please, although some of the bigger posts can be a brutal session of cut and paste.
What a great site!
i like flac
flac,flac,flac,
lossless rulz
An ISO image of the cd is also lossless.
FLAC please, but ALBUM WRAP (the whole CD in one sole file). I think this is the best.
Thanks a lot for your work anyway.
ISO
Great question Dave, but FLAC works so well.
I vote FLAC.
Flac please Dave. And thanks as always for the great music you share with us.
Hello Dave,
I rarely burn to CD these days (TB drive will do), so FLAC is preferable.
Phil
You are too funny...thank you first of all. My preference would be flac. I posted a question a while back but I'm not sure you saw so here it is again: Any chance of the most recent tours of Pearl Jam or Neil Young showing up soon? I'd love to have the Boston PJ show. Thanks again for all you do....
I always liked having music in FLAC than on CDs. It's your call Dave but I would vote for FLACs..
Thanks again for al your hard work Dave, I'll come down as a FLAC lover!
Ian
I'm cool with either format and have no probs working with either, they are both lossless. Thanks Dave for all of your hard work, your blog ROCKS!!!
Dave,
I personally prefer FLAC. That format allows me to either listen to it using MediaMonkey or converet it to WAV for CD-burning or to MP3 to listen on my personal MP3 player.
Imaging it unfortunately won't work out for me.
So I vote for FLAC please.
FLA-Anonymous
FLAC please. Wow, look at all the people who use this site, awesome!
FLAC
flac please
FLAC files are better, imho, becouse thy're simple to use and faster to download
Lu
Another vote for FLAC here.
Love this site btw. Thanks.
Crack. I mean FLAC.
i would say to stay with the flacs since i do not always burn all shows in full====some i listen to on mobile device======sometimes i may only listen to or burn a disk parts of a show..........regardless, its your blog and you are the one doing the work, if it is easier for you to do it this way......do it....no one should complain a bit.....i would certainly still be a regular...i would probably just dl the iso and extract what i wanted.....also if you had wav or shn as source files the quality could be better although flac is a lossless format there is nothing like a 44.1k wave , thanks much for all your hard work and dedication.................cinnamon
source: silver>eac(securemode)>flac.
I think you should(in this special instance) post both iso and flac.
Its obvious most people are more comfortable with flac, but many would prefer iso.
I'm also more comfortable with flac but I game for learning something new.
If it's one or the other I vote for iso!
Can't teach an old dog new tricks, I barely manage to get through flac, please don't make me learn a whole new process! :) Flac please!
FLAC please! :o)
Flac, SHN or APE only PLEASE
FLAC
flac please (｀･ω･´)
ISO
FLAC only is my vote! Thanks Dave!
Can I second that hope for a recent Neil Young/Bert Jansch live boot please?
And - FLAC please!
flac please. thank you!!
I'm a FLAC kinda guy. Thanks for everything!
Tim
My vote is for flac.
"You won't go back, once you've had flac!"
FLAC FLAC FLAC please
Flac for me.
Best, Dutchy
FLAC ... I burn a backup disc after download in case my hard drive crashes. It crashed twice and I lost everything that was'nt backed up. Kepp up the good work! Music is the best!!!
Prefer FLAC forthe time being
While I would like to say 'whatever works for you', I'm not going to in this case. I have a bunch of .iso files scattered around my archives needing to be reripped to something similar to everything else. However at this point in time, I just don't have the time to mess with something else (no matter how simple or quick it may be to do so).
I'll live with it if I have to but I would much prefer FLAC to be able to work with/listen to.
I'll roll with the punches....whatever works for you!
Flac Please
I PREFERE FLAC PLEASE
FLAC please
The ISO users insist that ISO is a perfect copy of the CD, but that is precisely what FLAC is, too.
You just rip the CD using EAC (exact audio copy)
Flac is much more flexible. Like many people I rarely burn to CD nowadays (all my boots are on an external harddrive). And besides, boots are increasingly being released in 24bit, which is obviously higher than 16bit CD quality...
Flac, please
FLAC please!!
That's a FLAC, Jack!
Thank you for all your efforts to bring us this music. I'm not too much into Floyd or Zep, but when you post an artist I'm really into, it brings some sunshine into my otherwise miserable life.
FLAC please, thanks!
Interesting... verdict seems Flac, but honestly, I don't care. For Dave it's probably easier to work with iso... so Dave... go for iso, You're doing absolute brilliant things and converting iso to flac.. ah well... only a small step for men(kind)... who said that before? (NA)
Thx for all the great stuff you gave (and will give) us.
Peter
FLAC please.
Like I imagine most people here will do, I can just drop them straight into my collection.
Thanks for all your hard work, it really is appreciated.
Simon.
I'd say FLAC. There is no reason to break protocol, and no reason to be in a hurry.
I have been messing around with this stuff for about 6 years now, and have never messed with the other thing you mentioned.
I have over 500 GB of live shows stored on DVDs - but they are all FLAC or SHN files.
I'd say FLAC. There is no reason to break protocol, and no reason to be in a hurry.
I have been messing around with this stuff for about 6 years now, and have never messed with the other thing you mentioned.
I have over 500 GB of live shows stored on DVDs - but they are all FLAC or SHN files.
FLAC, please. Or SHN, or APE. ISO is a good fourth choice, though.
Dave, I wouldn't mind in which format you'll upp the mentioned CDs : flac or ISO - both is good for me.
In my opinion ISO files have the one advantage that it's hard to detect from the outside what the file contains. So it might be safer to do it this way.
Anyway, thousand thanks for all your hard work which is highly appreciated.
I wanted to be the 100th comment and say thanks again for all you do. Looks like flac is winning out.
Hola Dave.
El formato que sea mas comodo para ti, personalmente prefiero FLAC.
Gracias Amigo!!!!
i prefer flac, but its up to you, and thanks again for all these boots!
hag
FLAC for me.
FLAC please
People still make CD's?
FLAC still is the best IMHO.
thank you
flac and thanks for your work
Flac is my choice.
FLAC, pleas, and thanks again for all your hard work.
FLAC please. I can't remember when was the last time I burnt a cdr. I keep all the stuff on dvds or external hdds. AFAIK Flacs would be smaller.
Thank you for all bootlegs here!
Flac for me please
FLAC is where it's at.
FLAC Absolutely FLAC! :-)
flac please ........
iso , only iso please.
thanks
FLAC
FLAC.
And Dave, thanks for... we all know.
Ondrej
F
L
A
C
I prefer Flac files. Thanks for the BIG JOB...
As long as the format is lossless, it doesn't matter to me what the files are ripped to. Flac, shn, or iso are all fantastic and are easy enough to work with. Yeah it is also nice to see how many people do use this site...in my opinion it is THE BEST live music blog out there...YOU ROCK Dave!!!
I have come to think that the .iso are the way to go, thanks for asking and thanks for the incredible work
I would personally prefer flac.
Great site. Thanks for all that you do!
Thanks to ask what we prefer !
And a big THANKS for all your work.
I have 5 or 6 To of music in flac/shn so I can't burn cd (therefore I sleep outside) then I prefer flac ;)
doobie1
FLAC.
FLAC or similar, please! :-)
It's more convenient to download only one part and take a listen to one or two tracks and so decide whether you want to download the whole thing.
I don't care either way as long as the .iso is split into smaller rars; I have a lot of problems with both Mega & RS hanging in the middle of dl's (I only have the problem with those 2 sites) & doubt I'd be successful dl'ing 1 large file.
Thanks for all you do here, your blog is a daily stop for me.
I prefer FLAC :)
And thanks again for all your hard work here! :)
Whatever you choose, you're the boss and you do a great job.
Why ask people for what they prefer? Polls will never make humanity progress because everyone is reluctant to what is not the usual habit.
So, please, do as you like.
Thanks in advance.
My vote goes to FLAC, Thanks a lot in advance.
Regards
Thomas
I would have to go with flac. I play music on my ipod, and I would have to convert a disc image (I'd have to track down the software also to do this). FLAC is the collecting standard for a number of years now, and I have software on my ipod that plays FLAC.
ISO is the best and gives you less work
FLAC is preferred, but if you go with ISO, please include the .cue file so I can extract the files (Medieval CUE splitter). I only do mp3 and flac, so I'd have to do the extra steps necessary to convert the ISO.
That being said, I love the site, but I only download about 10% of your posts, so the extra steps required to get the ISO converted to FLAC would not affect me that much.
I guess people still burn cd-rs?
Maybe for the car?
Anyway, i would say do what's easier more convenient for you, Dave, since you usually do so many postings!
(I usually just stream the shows anyway.)
ISO means no compression, and would be the best - but not everyone might want to burn directly on CD - FLAC is better for peeps who play music from their computers directly - Why not do both?
i prefer flac, thanks
FLAC, please.
I have my computer hooked up to my sound system, and I convert to .aiff for ipod portability. I rarely burn to cd.
flac is more flexible.
it would give me more scope.
the files would still need to be split into parts for downloading.
sometimes i only want the first part of a file.
i can download the first flac files and do this.
i wouldnt be able to do this with an ISO file.
great work by the way...
FLAC please.
I never burn.
ISO files extract into VOB and AOB files (in my experiences with them)
and without buying expensive software,there is no way to convert the files to FLAC,WAV,MP3 or even a video file like an AVI,MP4 or a WMV.
Hence please stick to FLAC files or offer both choices...Thanks.
I'd vote flac myself. I've downloaded image file elsewhere..then converted to more standard (flac) later.
Also, not too sound like too much of a prima-donna. Separate files.Recently you upped a series of Stones, of which I had only Volumes 1-2. But, they were one long track. I ended up binning them, as much as it was nice to finally get a copy, its hard for an old geez like me to sit down with Audacity and separate tracks.
I actually almost regret saying anything tho, because you clearly work damn hard.
thanks for everything.
Post a Comment