[q]

I know this has been posted before, but does anyone have a copy of Busted's Sleeping With The Light On when they performed it live on the Chris Moyles show sometime during August/July?

I did record most of it off DTT, and left it on a timer as I had to go somewhere and as sod's law would dictate, they started to do Sleeping With The Light On at 5:00 (I thought they would have done it before!), when I had set it to stop recording, and as a consquence it cut out half way through the song.

So, does anyone have a good quality copy of the song?

By good quality, I mean

Recorded in MP3 at 224/256/320kbits, Stereo, 44100/48000Hz OR 44100Hz/48000Hz Uncompressed WAV

Recorded directly from a Digital Terrestrial/Satellite/Cable feed and NOT from the live R1 Real stream or from analogue radio (unless there is no fuzz or inteference).

Maxiumum loudness to be at -3 db, and not at 0db (or clipped). The input source must also not be distorted.

I know these requirements are specific, but I have been wanting to find this clip for a while and don't want any bad quality material.

[Aaron]

demands, demands, demands. Only just arrived and requesting something that was on months ago with specific requirements.

[Sidders]

:arrow: Recorded in MP3 at 224/256/320kbits, Stereo, 44100/48000Hz OR 44100Hz/48000Hz Uncompressed WAV

What's the point in that?? Anything above 128kbps or 44100Hz is pointless because the human ear can't distinguish the difference.

[Mcqueen_]

I know this has been posted before, but does anyone have a copy of Busted's Sleeping With The Light On when they performed it live on the Chris Moyles show sometime during August/July?

...

I know these requirements are specific, but I have been wanting to find this clip for a while and don't want any bad quality material.

I think you'll most likely be waiting even longer with such specific requirements.

As you said the clips was requested before, i posted them and they are now in the sound vault. I dont save the files with such quality as requested and i doubt anyone else here who records does either.

[Dickie]

Now i don't think that i'm the first to think that that request is just too specific.

A bit silly.

[David]

its like 'Q' wants to use it for his/her own radio show...

[Golden Syrup]

is anybody else slightly confused by q's post? wot does it all mean!?!

[Dickie]

If you knew a little about Sound/Audio it isn't very detailed/difficult at all.

That wasn't meant to sound patronising.

[q]

:arrow: Recorded in MP3 at 224/256/320kbits, Stereo, 44100/48000Hz OR 44100Hz/48000Hz Uncompressed WAV

What's the point in that?? Anything above 128kbps or 44100Hz is pointless because the human ear can't distinguish the difference.

The human ear can detect when something has been encoded at 128kbit/s because of the slurring or burbling. 128kbit/s isn't good quality for all types of music.

I find that most of the MP3's that are avilable for download off the web are too loud and distort, or are simply re-encoded from lower bitrate material (e.g. 128kbit/s or 96kbit/s) to make them look better (you know..ooh theres a good quality mp3 etc). But it does become apparent when you listen to them after downloading.

As you said the clips was requested before, i posted them and they are now in the sound vault. I dont save the files with such quality as requested and i doubt anyone else here who records does either.

128/160kbits at 44,100hz would be sort of OK, because then it would actually be not too bad (although not the best quality) would be better than the current offering of 64kbits at 22khz which doesn't sound great.

I do record some clips from the Chris Moyles show (when I am at home) at 224kbit/s MP3 in 44,100Hz or 48,000Hz and they sound good. I am willing to offer some better quality material to the archive, but as I said, I do not record everything so it will only be stuff that I have.

demands, demands, demands. Only just arrived and requesting something that was on months ago with specific requirements.

Well I was going to request this just after the date of the thing but that was put on hold for a number of reasons. I will not go into these on a public forum.

Now i don't think that i'm the first to think that that request is just too specific.

A bit silly.

Too specific?

Do you not care about the quality of material you are recording then, because I do!

I do not record material simply to stick it on a website for download, and even if I did, I would ensure that it is of the best quality, with regards to the source of the input, levels and quality at which the file is recorded at.

I'm sorry if I'm being too specific and 'silly' but have you ever heard of the phrase quality not quantity?

[Sidders]

:arrow: Recorded in MP3 at 224/256/320kbits, Stereo, 44100/48000Hz OR 44100Hz/48000Hz Uncompressed WAV

What's the point in that?? Anything above 128kbps or 44100Hz is pointless because the human ear can't distinguish the difference.

The human ear can detect when something has been encoded at 128kbit/s because of the slurring or burbling. 128kbit/s isn't good quality for all types of music.

I bet you any amount of money that if I played a song at 128kbps and then played the same song at 256kpbs and didn't tell you which was which, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Especially since FM radio would only be equivalent to 96kbps anyway...

[q]

:arrow: Recorded in MP3 at 224/256/320kbits, Stereo, 44100/48000Hz OR 44100Hz/48000Hz Uncompressed WAV

What's the point in that?? Anything above 128kbps or 44100Hz is pointless because the human ear can't distinguish the difference.

The human ear can detect when something has been encoded at 128kbit/s because of the slurring or burbling. 128kbit/s isn't good quality for all types of music.

I bet you any amount of money that if I played a song at 128kbps and then played the same song at 256kpbs and didn't tell you which was which, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Especially since FM radio would only be equivalent to 96kbps anyway...

Well it depends on what type of music it is. True it's hardly recognisable with some types of music (e.g. quiet classical) but becomes more apparent with music such as rock (just listen to Kerrang on Freeview and you'll see what I mean).

[Sidders]

No I won't see what you mean because you are wrong.

[Uglybob]

i usually download tracks at 128 cos its good quality, if i download at 160, its usually poor cos theyve taped it off the radio.

[Dickie]

Now i don't think that i'm the first to think that that request is just too specific.

A bit silly.

Too specific?

Do you not care about the quality of material you are recording then, because I do!

I do not record material simply to stick it on a website for download, and even if I did, I would ensure that it is of the best quality, with regards to the source of the input, levels and quality at which the file is recorded at.

I'm sorry if I'm being too specific and 'silly' but have you ever heard of the phrase quality not quantity?

Look, this is an interest that we all have in common (Moyles). It's not as if i get paid for recording every show.

Cut us a little slack MR. AUDIO.[/quote]

[David]

:arrow: Recorded in MP3 at 224/256/320kbits, Stereo, 44100/48000Hz OR 44100Hz/48000Hz Uncompressed WAV

What's the point in that?? Anything above 128kbps or 44100Hz is pointless because the human ear can't distinguish the difference.

The human ear can detect when something has been encoded at 128kbit/s because of the slurring or burbling. 128kbit/s isn't good quality for all types of music.

I bet you any amount of money that if I played a song at 128kbps and then played the same song at 256kpbs and didn't tell you which was which, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Especially since FM radio would only be equivalent to 96kbps anyway...

Yeah Sidla your right about that. and digital radio is either 192kps or 128kps, I cant remember which one it is, as it's different for different stations as the BBC has to share their bandwidth between all the stations. And stations like radio 1 get more than stations like radio 4 because radio 4 is all speech. But eitherway, you cant get a 256kps recording of Radio 1... unless your actually in the radio 1 studio recording it.

[Sidders]

Yeah Sidla your right about that. and digital radio is either 192kps or 128kps, I cant remember which one it is,

It'll be 128, because 128 is CD quality.

[Mcqueen_]

I do not record material simply to stick it on a website for download, and even if I did, I would ensure that it is of the best quality, with regards to the source of the input, levels and quality at which the file is recorded at.

I'm sorry if I'm being too specific and 'silly' but have you ever heard of the phrase quality not quantity?

Well i do record material simply to stick it on a website for download. It is saved at a quality that is listenable. I see no point in it been saved as the best it can be when it can't be noticed anyway.

I dont see how the 'quality not quantity' phrase is relevant. The quantity (length) of the sound clip would be the same, just better 'quality' (which isn't noticeable anyway).

I record off FM anyway and with such demands i doubt you will find the files you are looking for.

[jimmy g]

Yeah Sidla your right about that. and digital radio is either 192kps or 128kps, I cant remember which one it is,

It'll be 128, because 128 is CD quality.

I think it might be even less. And it is mp2 not mp3, so the quality it significantly less than a 128kbs mp3. They are thinking to changing from mp2 to WMA 9. I would think that the best quality you are likely to get is via Sky Digital.

[David]

is mp2 not supposed to be better quality than mp3?

[Dopey]

I thought mp2 was just video and no audio or is that mp1?

[David]

not too sure, but there deffinetly is mp2 audio files.

[jimmy g]

MP2 is similar to MP3 in how it works. It is only on two layers as apposed to three, which is why the files are larger for the same quality. MP1 would not work as it would only have one tone.

It was the predecessor of MP3 but never really took off. When they where designing DAB MP3 had not been invented.

The history of the mpeg is fascinating, isn’t it.

[Sidders]

The history of the mpeg is fascinating, isn’t it.

I'm studying it for my final year project, so I hope so.

[q]

Cut us a little slack MR. AUDIO.

Fine then, I shall.

Your "Chris Moyles Calls Will" clip is not too bad and I would be willing to accept material of that quality (the busted song) if you have it, but no lower.

[Adam]

Why do u want such high quality?