[RESOLVED] Error Milton, John Paradise Lost

Report & help check download problems, corrupted files, badly-named files, bad links etc. (NOT for style & reading complaints)
Post Reply
ktcohen
Posts: 7
Joined: October 26th, 2008, 5:30 pm

Post by ktcohen » October 26th, 2008, 5:50 pm

1) Paradise Lost by John Milton

2) http://librivox.org/paradise-lost-by-john-milton/

3) The error occurs somewhere between Book 5 part 1, and Book 9 part1.

4) The file format I used was mp3 @ 128kbps.

5) I did not download the file, but instead played the recording on iTunes, which was an option on my computer.

6) Either the files are miss named, or one part of the novel is missing. Books 1 through 4 are fine, but somewhere between Book 5 and 9 the problem occurs. I'm really sorry, but I can't narrow it down more than that.

7) This happened on October 26, 2008 at around 7:30 EST

Thank you for checking this out! Let me know if there is anything I can do!

lezer
Posts: 8714
Joined: July 28th, 2007, 3:27 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by lezer » October 26th, 2008, 10:47 pm

Took a quick check between those files (#09-17) - in the player on the archive.org page they seem to be in the right order (but I only went by what the reader said, I didn't check with the text).

What does strike me: part #13 is called "Book Seven, Part 2" on the LV catalog page and in the archive.org player-window - though it is "Book Seven, Part 1" - which does seem to be corrected on the archive.org page itself (probably by the edit function?) but in the files themselves, the ID3 tag still says "Book Seven, Part 2".

However, since the ID3 tags start off with a number (which numbers have the correct order) - I would imagine they would still play in the correct order??

But this might have been the thing that struck you, ktcohen?


So, in conclusion, the ID3 tag of #13 is incorrect. I have no time to change that now (have to get to my job). Someone else have some time?

Anna

lezer
Posts: 8714
Joined: July 28th, 2007, 3:27 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by lezer » October 27th, 2008, 3:03 pm

OK - I'll see whether I succeed in correcting this.

ktcohen
Posts: 7
Joined: October 26th, 2008, 5:30 pm

Post by ktcohen » October 27th, 2008, 3:19 pm

Just to clarify, I was reading along with the text when I discovered this. Sorry if I wasn't clear about that before! :) Thank you for checking this out for me!

lezer
Posts: 8714
Joined: July 28th, 2007, 3:27 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by lezer » October 27th, 2008, 3:34 pm

Well, then I'm not sure whether the faulty tag was the problem - I doubt it...

So you say you were missing a piece of the text?? Was there a repetition of a part? Or how long was the missing part, approximately: a few minutes, or a whole section?

I checked the file lengths, and they correspond with what I think they should be (for insiders: they correspond with the durations given in the Validator). So there is no obvious truncation of files (a common problem with the derivation process).

(OK - the new file #13 has just been put on Archive.org)

Anyone have any more ideas on what to do here?

ktcohen
Posts: 7
Joined: October 26th, 2008, 5:30 pm

Post by ktcohen » October 27th, 2008, 3:38 pm

I really do think that there has to be a piece missing then. I didn't listen to the whole novel, so I don't know the missing peice is. All I know is that both parts of book 9 where labled as book 8 and that book 10 was labled as book 9.

lezer
Posts: 8714
Joined: July 28th, 2007, 3:27 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by lezer » October 27th, 2008, 3:59 pm

Well, I listened a but further - and detected something more -
I listened to the first few seconds of each recording (so after the disclaimer) of the last four sections (so book 9 & book 10), following along with the text. All the ID3 tags seem to be correct - but...

For recording 17 & 18 (= book 9 part I & II) - the reader starts with reading the so-called "argument" - a kind of summary I guess of the book. This is not in the Gutenberg text they were supposed to be reading from, but can be found in other (online) sources. So the first few minutes of the readings, at least of Book 9, are different from the Gutenberg text. After that, the "real poem" text starts off correctly.

I didn't check all files, but perhaps more of them start off with this "argument". Could that perhaps be what you noticed ktcohen?

ktcohen
Posts: 7
Joined: October 26th, 2008, 5:30 pm

Post by ktcohen » October 27th, 2008, 4:02 pm

No, because the text I was using had the argument inculded along with the rest of the text. Maybe it was something that was just happening the day I was using it...

lezer
Posts: 8714
Joined: July 28th, 2007, 3:27 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by lezer » October 27th, 2008, 4:05 pm

Well - I didn't listen to the whole file, so there might very well be something missing... Hard to know, now...
Or was it the fact that some of the readers DON'T read that "argument"? (I'm just grasping at straws here...)

Maybe someone else will come along who has noticed where the missing text would be, exactly? That will help in pinpointing it.

By the way, before I forget, thank you for coming here especially to point this out to us! It is so easy for something to go wrong in the amount of work we produce...

ktcohen
Posts: 7
Joined: October 26th, 2008, 5:30 pm

Post by ktcohen » October 30th, 2008, 2:29 pm

You are extremely welcome! You guys do really good work, and I am glad to help in any way I can. Again, I'm am really sorry that I can't pinpoint the problem further. I had to give back the text that I had back, but I might try to get it from the library and help out that way! I'll get back to you.

lezer
Posts: 8714
Joined: July 28th, 2007, 3:27 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by lezer » November 3rd, 2008, 11:25 am

Hi kt,
We had a comment similar to yours here: http://librivox.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=16380

I am beginning to suspect that there might be different text versions?? I know nothing whatsoever about it - but I've also checked the readings of Book VIII now, and they too follow the Gutenberg text.

What kind of source were you reading from (too bad you had to return it!)?

Anna

lezer
Posts: 8714
Joined: July 28th, 2007, 3:27 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Post by lezer » November 3rd, 2008, 3:54 pm

OK - see my comments in the other thread.

I'm going to unstickify this thread, to keep the discussion all in one place, ktcohen. I think we've caught the problem! Now it needs some work to solve it...

ktcohen
Posts: 7
Joined: October 26th, 2008, 5:30 pm

Post by ktcohen » November 3rd, 2008, 6:50 pm

Awesome, that sounds great!

To answer your question, lezer, I was using the 2000 printing from Penguin Group publishing. If you need any more information, such as the editors name or something like that, let me know!

RuthieG
Posts: 22022
Joined: April 17th, 2008, 8:41 am
Location: Kent, England
Contact:

Post by RuthieG » November 4th, 2008, 10:58 am

The mystery is solved. :)

This is a recording of the text of Milton's first edition of 1667, which had ten books, unlike the second edition (1674) which was redivided into twelve books in the manner of Virgil's Aeneid. See Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise_Lost

I have added a note to the Librivox and archive.org catalogue pages to this effect.

Ruth
My LV catalogue page | RuthieG's CataBlog of recordings | Tweet: @RuthGolding

ktcohen
Posts: 7
Joined: October 26th, 2008, 5:30 pm

Post by ktcohen » November 4th, 2008, 4:47 pm

Oh! That makes a lot of sense then! I was starting to think I was crazy! Thanks for checking this out for me!

Post Reply