Archive

Postby Billbbill » Thu Dec 01, 2005 4:58 pm

Sounds like a plan. Only I don't know the first thing about bit torrent. I suppose I'll have to learn. Thanks.
User avatar
Billbbill
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1790
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Southern Westchester NY

Postby strumminsix » Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:45 pm

Here is what I wrote for a friend about a year back.

Most of it is still perfect except I use a different BT program:
http://azureus.sourceforge.net/

I'll help you in any way I can.



Step 1 - Get the download client called Bit Torrent:
http://bt.degreez.net/

Q&A:
http://wiki.etree.org/index.php?page=BitTorrent

http://knowbuddy.dyndns.org:81/torrent/ ... ml#fwwinxp


Step 2 - BT shows are sent in a format called SHN, get
the client, called MKWm to check sums and convert to WAV:
http://etree.org/software.html
*This site also has a client to play SHNs you can use WinAmp

with a plug-in called ShnAmp.


A very good Bit Torrent info site:
http://wiki.etree.org/index.php?page=BitTorrent

A few good sources for configuring your pc for optimal downloading:
http://gruven42.webhop.org/xpfwbt/xp_firewall_bt.htm


Now download the music:
I usually use www.dozin.com/ (for Bit Torrent downloads)
Or frequently http://bt.etree.org/ (for Bit Torrent downloads)
Often times I've used http://gdlive.com/ (for FTP downloads)
Never used, but www.sharingthegroove.org/msgboard/ is supposed to be good.

Just found, know noting about, but it is referenced on a reliable site:
http://wiki.etree.org/index.php?page=ShnLinks


Just look for SHN, BT or FTP and you should be in the right direction!
User avatar
strumminsix
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6750
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 8:13 am
Location: Chicago

Postby strumminsix » Thu Dec 01, 2005 8:59 pm

Sign up for this site, it's one of the best: http://tmnsp.net/details.php?id=1129

Here are the details:
Description Jerry Garcia Band
French's Camp on the Eel River
Piercy, CA
August 29, 1987

[b]SBD + AUD Matrix Mix (60%-SBD/40%-AUD)[/b]

Disc 1 - Acoustic Set

01 [07:15] Deep Elem Blues
02 [05:41] I've Been All Around This World
03 [07:40] Friend Of The Devil
04 [05:02] Trouble In Mind
05 [04:26] Little Sadie
06 [04:10] Diamond Joe >
07 [04:55] Spike Driver Blues
08 [06:15] Oh Babe, It Ain't No Lie
09 [04:26] I'm Troubled
10 [04:21] Ripple
TT [54:16]

Disc 2 - Electric Set 1

01 [08:12] How Sweet It Is
02 [07:29] Forever Young
03 [06:51] Get Out Of My Life
04 [05:46] Run For The Roses
05 [06:11] And It Stoned Me
06 [04:01] My Sisters and Brothers >
07 [06:54] Deal
TT [45:26]

Disc 3 - Electric Set 2

01 [10:49] The Harder They Come
02 [07:56] I Shall Be Released
03 [06:47] Think
04 [02:59] Evangeline
05 [06:19] Gomorrah
06 [06:36] Let It Rock
07 [08:29] That Lucky Old Sun
08 [09:44] Tangled Up In Blue
TT [59:43]
User avatar
strumminsix
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6750
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 8:13 am
Location: Chicago

Postby Billbbill » Fri Dec 02, 2005 5:17 am

Thanks SS, I appreciate the help. I guess I'm partway there as I've been downloading and converting SHN to WAV for quite a while now.

I just have to tackle the BT angle.
Thanks again.
User avatar
Billbbill
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1790
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Southern Westchester NY

Postby strumminsix » Fri Dec 02, 2005 8:37 am

If you are good w/ converting SNH & FLAC > WAV > CD you are more than halfway there.

I promise to help you out as best I can. As you can see I am here a few times a day so any answer won't be long away!


Here are a couple links from stuff I published on a site I no longer hang out at:

http://p095.ezboard.com/fdeadhookfrm42. ... D=19.topic

http://p095.ezboard.com/fdeadhookfrm42. ... D=15.topic

The board owner has changed and mod'd one of these but content is still good.
User avatar
strumminsix
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6750
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 8:13 am
Location: Chicago

Postby Billbbill » Fri Dec 02, 2005 11:37 am

Thanks.
User avatar
Billbbill
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1790
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 6:44 pm
Location: Southern Westchester NY

Bob's statement on Archive mess

Postby jck_strw » Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:18 pm

Poor Bob. I'm not sure what I feel sorrier for--his inability to talk (acid casualty) or his mistaken belief that archive.org was "stealing" from them.

http://www.squeezeburger.com/bob.mp3

Somebod on rec.music.gdead had a good point--remember when Phil was the asshole and Bobby was the cool one? The times they are a-changin'.
http://db.etree.org/jck_strw - Tapelist
-----
"Now get back to the stands before I shave off half your mustache and shove it up your left nostril. "
Bad News Bears
User avatar
jck_strw
Senior Member
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 5:23 pm
Location: The mountains of Colorado

Mickey's statement

Postby jck_strw » Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:19 pm

A Statement From Mickey About Archive.org

The last several days have been a whirlwind of activity and commentary
regarding the Grateful Dead and archive.org. I am posting this message due
to the fact that despite news stories to the contrary, I have been one of
the earliest backers of the taping and sharing of Grateful Dead music. I
fully support the position taken by Phil in his message and always have.
Being a field recordist myself, I stand united with the taper community and
always will notwithstanding anything in the media to the contrary. Efforts
have been made by Grateful Dead Productions and archive.org to rectify the
situation and I hope our loyal fans, friends and family will continue to
enjoy and participate in Grateful Dead music.
http://db.etree.org/jck_strw - Tapelist
-----
"Now get back to the stands before I shave off half your mustache and shove it up your left nostril. "
Bad News Bears
User avatar
jck_strw
Senior Member
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 5:23 pm
Location: The mountains of Colorado

Re: Bob's statement on Archive mess

Postby strumminsix » Sun Dec 04, 2005 3:41 pm

jck_strw wrote:Poor Bob. I'm not sure what I feel sorrier for--his inability to talk (acid casualty) or his mistaken belief that archive.org was "stealing" from them.

http://www.squeezeburger.com/bob.mp3

Somebod on rec.music.gdead had a good point--remember when Phil was the asshole and Bobby was the cool one? The times they are a-changin'.


Bobby speaks quite well if you listen to the whole interview.

If you know your GD history you'll know that Bobby was one of the most sober members of the band so I highly, highly doubt acid casualty is even semi-appropriate.

I don't know what's so hard to understand about this.

Patches from the SBD were never authorized by GDM/GDP. It was the result of rogue decisions by Healy. However, that also leave the organization open for liability due to being the source.

You bash Bobby and quote Mickey? Mickey is acting like a piece of shit politician. He makes leading remarks but never stakes his true position:

"I have been one of the earliest backers of the taping and sharing of Grateful Dead music."
" I fully support the position taken by Phil"
" I stand united with the taper community "

Where does he say he feels the same way as Phil?

Where does he state his position on SBDs?

Just a bunch of double talk.

"Support" does notequal agree.

Tapers use microphones not SBD patches.

"United" doesn't mean in support of.

At least Bobby had the balls to say what he did.


Bobby is not the asshole here. Where was Phil when the decisions had to be made? Nowhere. Where was anyone else for that matter? Absent.

They GDM/GDP never allowed SBDs. If you think this is a laughing matter or that I am full of shit try talking to Rob Eaton or Charlie Miller and ask them about a few of their SBDs that *NEVER* made it into cirulation because of problems.

Why is so difficult? He is so freakin' crystal clear "distribuing their songs without agreement". Because the music is from the SBD it is the responsibility of the GD. Therefore if it is being spread, they either need permission or royalties.

Funny Bobby keeps saying "we" while the other bandmates are absent.

Think of it this way, if you go into a McDonalds ready to buy lunch, and someone behind the counter sneakily gives you a burger you are in possession of stolen merchandise.

Same with the SBDs.

If they planned to release SBDs commercially then yes it is stealing. And yes it puts the band in violation of their contract with Apple/iTunes.

Don't fool yourself, Jerry wanted this before he died. He wanted to allow sales of concerts (mixed & mastered) to be the legacy of the GD to support the organization after they retired. Look up his comments of "Touch of Grey" hitting the top 10 and "selling out".
User avatar
strumminsix
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6750
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 8:13 am
Location: Chicago

Re: Bob's statement on Archive mess

Postby ebick » Mon Dec 05, 2005 6:37 am

jck_strw wrote:Poor Bob. I'm not sure what I feel sorrier for--his inability to talk (acid casualty) or his mistaken belief that archive.org was "stealing" from them.


jck_strw (et. al.) I listened to this and I think you took those comments out of context. What I heard Bob say with regard to "stealing" was more about cover material. Here's the deal. If you record the published work of another and you sell it along with something of your own or in any other way under your name, in addition to getting permission to do so, you MUST pay royalties to that artist as required by that publishing company. Even if you do not intend to sell it, but instead, give it away, you must still get permission.

AUD tapes represent something that the band has little or no control over. A band that has a no taping policy can not be responsible if some sneaks taping equipment in. The Dead's policy has always been that you can tape it and trade it, just don't sell it.

SBD tapes represent property that the band DOES (or should) have control over, as it was generated from their equipment. Therefore, they have a responsibility to other artists to not give it away or sell it without permission and/or royalties.

Put yourself in the position Chuck Berry. You wrote the song, it's yours, and somebody else is giving it away without your permission. It is irrelavent whether or not the artist in question has "enough money". You simply do not have the right to give away what is theirs.

This site itself poses some similar questions. I know that Gregg (host of the site) has had conversations with Ice Nine publishing (owner of the rights to GD songs) and for the time being, they are ok with the site. From time to time, we have gotten a bit nervous about the non-Ice Nine material, because we have not gotten permission from those publishers (what a job THAT would be!)

Make no mistake about it. If the surviving members of the Grateful Dead approached us and stated that they were unhappy about this site giving away their property without a royalty to them, you can bet your hat that we would honor and respect their wishes and feelings and this site would be gone. Likewise, if there were any threat of action (or hopefully first and courtious request) by a publisher of any of the other material we have posted to remove it, we would.

Gregg, you can feel free to jump in and add to or correct anything I've said here.

Ed Bick
User avatar
ebick
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1203
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 7:34 am
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby jck_strw » Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:00 am

The problem I have with the situation (and with Bob), is the way this was handled. I have no problem with the Dead pulling all the SBDs off archive.org and then charging for them. Their music, their right to do whatever they want with it. I've bought a ton of their stuff and I have no problem spending money on them.

Right now, there are two things pissing me off about this situation:

--The fact that it's been almost two weeks since they pulled the SBDs and we've yet to hear "officially" what's going on. We have statements from Phil and Mickey, a rambling interview with Bob (with a promise of a statement later that day that seems to have gotten lost on the way to the press), nothing from Billy and nothing from the "Grateful Dead". Like I said, I don't mind them taking the SBDs away. Those are their toys and they can do with it what they wish. But to take it all away and then not say anything is asinine.

--The reason I pity poor Bob is because he's either getting really bad information from his advisors or he's being completely disingenuous. He's not aware of archive.org? It's been in existence for 3 years. Archive.org gets permission from each band that they host on their site. They had gotten permission from the Dead at some point in the past. Several times in fact, permission from the Dead has been quantified. Now I'm sure permission did not come directly from Bob, but I find it highly suspicious that no one in the organisation ever mentioned it to him.

And this bullshit about cover songs? Funny, Ratdog allows their music to be hosted on archive.org and it seems to me Ratdog does a lot of cover songs. Bob didn't mention that in the interview. Funny, I just looked and I notice that there are several SBDs of Ratdog shows hosted on Archive.org. Where's Bob's indignation over that? Why isn't Bob making the same argument about cover songs and permissions from his Ratdog shows?

Look, I believe that Bob's in it for the money. Considering that this all went down at almost the exact same time the Grateful Dead redid their website, making it very easy for users to select a show, get a setlist, a review, etc. and, oh yeah, purchase it if currently available from DP or their Download Series. Someone told him how many Grateful Dead shows were being downloaded from archive.org and he saw dollar signs. Since I imagine they don't have the same amount of downloads for their official, way-over-priced, "Download Series", Bob probably thinks he's losing a ton of money. And I have no problem with that. He's entitled to make as much money as he can. But I don't want him giving me some bullshit, holier-than-thou reasons for his actions. Just tell me the fucking truth.

And that's what pisses me off. His lack of honesty.
http://db.etree.org/jck_strw - Tapelist
-----
"Now get back to the stands before I shave off half your mustache and shove it up your left nostril. "
Bad News Bears
User avatar
jck_strw
Senior Member
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 5:23 pm
Location: The mountains of Colorado

Postby phpbb » Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:19 am

Here's my honest opinion:

I have had a conversation with Ice Nine a few years back, and their position was that these tabs are to be considered the same as the rules found on the From The Dead link. But they are the only ones that I have had a conversation with, and I would comply with anything they or any artist says imidiately. In fact, I am working on contacting them again to see if the rules still apply, and asking for even more. In light of all that has happened, I think the existance of the non GD Tabs is very, very relevant.

The non Grateful Dead tabs have constantly been a problem for me. The fact that they can provide me any legal hassle makes them all the more unappealing. The misc section, and other artists sections do not even come close to the traffic that the grateful dead tabs do, so, the fact that they pose a threat to shutting down the whole site does not seem worth it to me.

The driving fact for me right now on this site is to ensure that there is never a lights out for rukind.com. There is so much going on with copyrights and music on the internet that I believe lyrics sites will once again be targeted. I would rather be ahead of the game instead of a target of the game.

One of the factors in what type of lawsuit you get (if any) is whether or not you profited from what you did, and we have not. In terms of making money on this site, I feel that there are avenues, none of which would ever require to pay for the tabs. However, I cannot pursue any of those avenues while this site hosts work that I did not get permission for.

I, for some reason, have grand hopes for this site, and would like a chance to pursue them. This would require getting rid of the liability until it is no longer a liability.

So, my position is a little stronger than Ed's: I think we stick to what is permitted, and don't wait for anyone to tell us to take it down.

When rukind.com went down the same time archive.org did, I took it as a Karmic mesage. Before I got the site back online, I seriously thought about going nuclear with the other tabs. I promise you that I send Ed yearly or biyearly emails regarding this issue. When bobby says:

"If we're perceived to be distributing their songs without their agreement, they have every right, and really and every obligation, to sue us"

I do not feel at all cozy, and don't think its worth it at all to me to even risk it. Even more, I think I have to act in such a way as to prevent that from happening.

I would appreciate other frequent user's opinion regarding this issue.
User avatar
phpbb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1039
Joined: Fri May 07, 2004 9:37 pm

Postby jck_strw » Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:34 am

Honestly I hardly ever look at the other tabs, so I wouldn't care if they were nuked.

However, in regards to those tabs, what would the artists object to? It's your|someone's interpretation of their song. The only thing they could complain about would be their lyrics. So, do like Olga did, take out the lyrics. So Dylan's Knockin' would look like:

INTRO: G-D, C

G D Am7
.. Mama take this ...
G D C
.. I can't use it ...
G D Am7
. It's getting dark, too dark ...
G D C (D)
. I feel I'm knockin on ...

No copyright violation there and those that use those tabs would get the gist.

But like I said, I don't really check the Other Tabs section, so I wouldn't care if they were gone.
http://db.etree.org/jck_strw - Tapelist
-----
"Now get back to the stands before I shave off half your mustache and shove it up your left nostril. "
Bad News Bears
User avatar
jck_strw
Senior Member
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 5:23 pm
Location: The mountains of Colorado

Postby strumminsix » Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:35 am

Great posts Ed & Gregg (I think.)

JS - Check out the RD site and look at their trading positions. Their policy on SBDs change by year. And if I recall correctly that year they stopped allowing SBDs to be traded and received coincided with their covers and distributing live shows.

Don't forget, Billy was a big proponent on removing SBDs as well as Bear as well as Bobby as well as Mickey who used a bunch of double talk but his support of microphone taping only has been his position for many years.

However, I think the worst part of all of this is that the GD weren't forthright with what's going on with the SBDs. IMO, this would have all been better off if they just relased a statement on their site.

Here are my final thoughts:
1. I respect everyone here and the opinions
2. I am appreciative of this site more than you know.
3. If the remaining GD members want to sell this and retire, good for them thanks for 40 years. shit I'll miss the shows more than be upset for a $20 download. Heck, most of spend more than that 2 hours in a bar vs. 3 hours of music.
User avatar
strumminsix
Senior Member
 
Posts: 6750
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 8:13 am
Location: Chicago

Postby phpbb » Mon Dec 05, 2005 9:43 am

jck-strw -

Thats right. It is the lyrics that are the issue.

I have been fiddling with a "Fair Use" tab while keeping the integrity of Ed's Tabs in tact.
User avatar
phpbb
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1039
Joined: Fri May 07, 2004 9:37 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Grateful Dead General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests