I'm starting a group to certify certain shows as guaranteed to get indigent hippie girls into bed with you. These will be known as "skank seeds."
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jamie Lutch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 11:54 PM Subject: [etree] Dankseeds (a bit long) > Hi all, > dont mean to start another thread, just wanted to shed a little light. > Before you post comments/continue the thread, please read the bw tax... > > PJP Said: > > I didn't really mean to start such a long thread. The point of my > > original comment was to suggest that the dankseeds group, which goes to > > such painstaking lengths to make sure that all of the objective aspects > > of a seed are top flight should also have some discussion of the actual > > listenability of the show. > > > When we started dankseeds, a lot of discussion went into setting the > criteria, and the criteria were established as: > Show is tracked well > Show plays at least as seamlessly as the source DAT > Show has no undocumented dae gens > Show has lineage provided > Show has not been unneccesarily resampled > Show has no diginoise or dropouts > > any of these can be overruled if by vote, it is agreed, for example: > to archive shows that are only available as master cass>audio cd>eac>shn > (lotsa older gd like this) > to archive shows where diginoise is known to be on the master (certain phish > sbds are like this) > > Focus is on listenability, but overall sound plays into that in > non-quantifiable ways. > > since source comparison is so subjective for newer shows, it was not put > into the criteria. However, a lot of pre-screening goes into the source > selection of newer shows. Candidates must first be known to be compliant > (full lineage from a good rig, no cuts/drops/flips,transferred on a > bit-accurate setup with no poor resampling, and known to sound pretty good. > Then, samples are put up to compare, at > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dankseeds/polls > > a lot more goes on behind that. I generally patch out of 2 or 3 rigs, then > usually only submit the best sounding imho before it even gets considered by > others > > as Brothercrow said: > > simply that at a show that has 20-50 tapers, out of those 20-50 tapers > > only half (or less) of those recordings will get widely traded. > > more often than not, it is out of that half of the recordings that the > > dankest copy(s) will be certified. some time after that a new > > (rare) source > > may surface which is better (altho i doubt there will ever be one that is > > VASTLY better) than the copy that was "danked". > > > generally, we are happy with 2 or 3 good sources. some trey shows from this > summer we had 5 very good versions to compare. (which was too many, I > think!) While you can never be sure you have _the best_ source, you can > approach it through reasonable comparison of known good sources. so say for > example, you have a larger show with a decent tapers section, like a phish > show. Say there were 4 schoeps rigs,a few neumanns, and a few b&k's. of > these rigs, most are in the section, but there are 3 good rigs up front. Say > the best tape that comes out that night is a schoeps TS = 100% on some > hypotheytical scale. Well, that taper didnt have a lot of people patched out > of him, and that show didnt get out in time for dankseeds comparison, which > compared 3 other HQ sources and another version is danked. Does that make > the first version not dank because its not the ultimate? no > > While you usually cant be sure you have the 100% best tape, by comparing > several hq sources for any given night, you should be in the 95% range 9 out > of 10 times, which is pretty good. > > FOB's are a different story, they are so remarkably different from TS tapes > in so many ways, that FOB's are considered/danked independently from TS > tapes. > > Where dankseeds shines is the seeding of older phish, pulling together the > best from several large collections, the objective criteria such as > completeness and cleanness become more dominant. Weve kinda moved away from > the danking of newer shows for awhile until most known versions surface. > > Occasionaly people bag on DS because a dank show doesnt sound perfect. But > geez, when you are talking a 1980 GD cassette master straight off a dragon, > you have to accept it for what it is. if you got a better one, bring it on! > > > PJP said: > > Finally, anyone who takes this as a slam on the dankseeds group, or as > > me mocking them, is simply wrong. These folks spend a lot of time to > > try to get the best seed out there and we all owe them some thanks for > > doing so. I just think that there should be some other criteria noted > > in the .dnk file, or whatever it is called. > > no offense taken, etree rules, dankseeds rules, though what each does is > different together lots of people get lots of hq music really really fast. > in so many ways it is a subset of etree, as dankseeds is just quantifying > the things a seed should be as defined in the etree seeding faq... > > Anyway, sorry if I wasted any bandwidth, I didnt read any of this tread, as > I had been browsing headers, and 'etree terminology' didnt spark my fancy. > I saw pjp's wrap-up comments, and wanted to make sure people knew what was > actually up with the source comparison. Anybody who is really into promoting > good sources, feel free to join DS, we can always use more active people. > > Thus bw tax is offered as follows: > 1. please dont reply to list. If you have questions/comments, please email > me directly > 2. I will take some logins on my serever for siteops who can host the dank. > We have over 100 shows done now, and need to focus more on hooking up to the > etree servers to get it out there. > > > funk on, > jamie > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.314 / Virus Database: 175 - Release Date: 1/11/2002 > _______________________________________________ > etree mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > http://mail.etree.org/mailman/listinfo/etree _______________________________________________ etree mailing list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://mail.etree.org/mailman/listinfo/etree
