Track List
The Ballad of Paladin
The Searchers
Cowpoke
Rollin' Dust
Hannah Lee
Streets of Laredo
The Long Tall Shadow
The Lilies Grow High
The Cottonwood Tree
Nineteen Men
The Lonely Man
The Last Round-Up

https://mega.nz/#F!q45iwI7T!KMcHo3Uuhu30KndW6Co5Kg

Enjoy,
Scott

Thank you.

Thanks for this, much appreciated.

But could you elaborate: DVD-rip? with or without sound effects? Bit-rate? Is this from one specific episode only? (Those titles don't seem to be episode titles)

EDIT:
The tracks contain roughly 30 minutes of music, and bitrate is 64 kbps.

2nd EDIT:
This is NOT a score, but a collection of folk/country songs recorded in the 1962. This apparently is a vinyl rip. All details of that release can be found here:

http://www.discogs.com/Johnny-Western-Have-Gun-Will-Travel/release/3685756

I had hoped to find some of Bernard Herrmann's original scores here (he scored the main theme and a few episodes, I believe). Nevertheless, your efforts are noted, though this is nothing for me. :)

Thanks for this, much appreciated.

But could you elaborate: DVD-rip? with or without sound effects? Bit-rate? Is this from one specific episode only? (Those titles don't seem to be episode titles)

EDIT:
The tracks contain roughly 30 minutes of music, and bitrate is 64 kbps.

2nd EDIT:
This is NOT a score, but a collection of folk/country songs recorded in the 1962. This apparently is a vinyl rip. All details of that release can be found here:

http://www.discogs.com/Johnny-Western-Have-Gun-Will-Travel/release/3685756

I had hoped to find some of Bernard Herrmann's original scores here (he scored the main theme and a few episodes, I believe). Nevertheless, your efforts are noted, though this is nothing for me. :)

I didn't know there was going to be a test. Frankly, I wouldn't know a bit-rate if it bit me in the ass. Nor do I need a CPU to enhance my listening experience. I like what I hear and trust that a few of us other ignorant peons in the asylum will do the same. If my insufficient knowledge of the idiosyncrasies of audio technology fails to meet your standards, you will not offend me if you ignore the download. :-D
PS: The theme from The Searchers was what caught my eye. If I find a version of it by anyone – Tiny Tim, Mrs. Miller, Beyonce – as sure as the turnin' of the earth, I'll post it.

I didn't know there was going to be a test. Frankly, I wouldn't know a bit-rate if it bit me in the ass. Nor do I need a CPU to enhance my listening experience. I like what I hear and trust that a few of us other ignorant peons in the asylum will do the same. If my insufficient knowledge of the idiosyncrasies of audio technology fails to meet your standards, you will not offend me if you ignore the download. :-D
PS: The theme from The Searchers was what caught my eye. If I find a version of it by anyone – Tiny Tim, Mrs. Miller, Beyonce – as sure as the turnin' of the earth, I'll post it.
Fair enough! :)

thank you!

mp3 bitrate 64 ?!I never thought to find bitrate so low in 2015

Great share!!! Thanks!!!!

mp3 bitrate 64 ?!I never thought to find bitrate so low in 2015

Y'know, I really should be embarrassed, but oddly enough am not.

Thank you Scott for all your wonderful and uniquely rare postings here.

Nice one, thanks!

Will download,listen and ENJOY,of course!
THANKS A TON!

Thank you for this Johnny Western album Creedmoor. The bitrate of 64 is good enough for me. The audio technology terms can get pretty detailed and difficult to understand. I have difficulty determining the difference in quality between a 64kbs to a 320kbs on older recordings with my ears. You can, however, convert the 64kbs file to a 320kbs file and not notice any loss in quality. Technology is great!

Thank you for this Johnny Western album Creedmoor. The bitrate of 64 is good enough for me. The audio technology terms can get pretty detailed and difficult to understand. I have difficulty determining the difference in quality between a 64kbs to a 320kbs on older recordings with my ears. You can, however, convert the 64kbs file to a 320kbs file and not notice any loss in quality. Technology is great!
That's true, there wouldn't be any loss in that case, but also no gain in quality, either, just increase the size of the file unnecessarily. But to draw an analogy here, it's like filling half a glass of martini with water until the glass is full. You still would have only half a glass of pure martini if you drink the full glass, the alcoholic effect on your body would be the same, no loss, no gain. But if you have a full glass of martini and pour half of it away before drinking, your body would only get half of the original alcohol!
Translated to the converting of an audio file, if you convert a file the other way around (from 320 to 64), the loss in quality would be quite heavy, even for an untrained ear like mine or yours, believe me!

Another great share.
As for bit rate rot, I don't recall ever going to a live 'flac' concert or ever recall seeing a 'flac' film in my life. Music is music, I either like it, or love it - for what it is.
Love the share by the way.
Many thanks. Keep it up.

My observations were only of technical nature, not trying to discredit Creedmoor in any way. If this would be something I was hunting for a long time, I too would be very grateful for this share, even in as low a bitrate as 64kbps! In that case, if this would be the only available upload, I would take it gladly. Only if there would be better bitrates available elsewhere, I would choose the best possible quality. Again, when I said earlier "this is nothing for me", I was referring to the MUSIC, not the BITRATE! :)

If I had a glass of half martini and half water I think I would then have a second. I bet the song would even sound better the second time around regardless of bit rate!

LOL! Yes, I bet you're right. But if you have too much martinis, I guess any kind of music would sound good to you, even a Justin Bieber song! :)

This is all too anal retentive for me. I would venture a good 80% of the people on this site have never seen the movies that accompany the soundtracks they so dutifully covet. They're just here to stockpile scores in case the Reds nuke us. I'd also venture the majority of us cheapos – eager not to pay for their soundtracks – haven't forked over a ton of dough for symphony-sounding equipment. You're listening through earbuds, but if the oscilloscope isn't hitting the required peaks, it must be bad!
If I'm going to use my eyes to listen to a score, I'd much rater do it in conjunction with watching a movie rather than staring at a CPU. As for bit rates and FLAC and mp3, personally I don't care so long as I can hear the music. 12kbs...64kbs...76 1/8thkbs...it's like a penis-measuring contest, for Christ's sake! Don't you have anything better to do with your time, like actually leaving the house and going to a movie theatre?
Enjoy the minutiae. I'm heading for the multiplex!

Quality rips with good bitrates and enjoying good movies in theatres isn't mutual exclusive. I can enjoy both. And if you want to hear some REAL "anal retentive" discussions about bitrates and co., there are other experts in this forum and elsewhere who own audio equipments I couldn't even begin to name or describe their function. You won't believe how intense and sometimes agressive and fundamentalistic those discussions can get, which always amuses me as a neutral observer. I'm an amateur in this respect like most of the "majority of cheapos" here, I can assure you. I know about formats (FLAC, mp3) and bitrate (64, 128, 192, 256, 320kbps and lossless), yes, but these basics are the end of my poor knowledge about audio measurements and all that matters, as far as I'm concerned. And, I'm enjoying all my music mostly through earbuds (not the cheap ones, I confess!), but other than foobar for converting purposes, I don't have any other equipment to analyze or measure the audio files. I can't measure their frequencies, amplitudes, nor length of their genitals, should they have any. :)

Quality rips with good bitrates and enjoying good movies in theatres isn't mutual exclusive. I can enjoy both. And if you want to hear some REAL "anal retentive" discussions about bitrates and co., there are other experts in this forum and elsewhere who own audio equipments I couldn't even begin to name or describe their function. You won't believe how intense and sometimes agressive and fundamentalistic those discussions can get, which always amuses me as a neutral observer. I'm an amateur in this respect like most of the "majority of cheapos" here, I can assure you. I know about formats (FLAC, mp3) and bitrate (64, 128, 192, 256, 320kbps and lossless), yes, but these basics are the end of my poor knowledge about audio measurements and all that matters, as far as I'm concerned. And, I'm enjoying all my music mostly through earbuds (not the cheap ones, I confess!), but other than foobar for converting purposes, I don't have any other equipment to analyze or measure the audio files. I can't measure their frequencies, amplitudes, nor length of their genitals, should they have any. :)

Thank you for this. It's nice to know I'm not the only novice on the bus. I have actually reached out to fellow member asking how to determine bit rates, etc., but no one gets back to me. Nor do I know if I want to invest that much time in it. I, too, am on earbuds only mine are plugged into a MacBook. (Mac doesn't like FLAC!) Yes, I have speakers, but generally don't use them unless I know the neighbors are away for the day. I am so happy to have rediscovered much of the music that I grew up loving that I am thrilled and grateful to find it in any format. I try to be a neutral observer, but damn if some of the requests don't reek of ingratitude. Look at what they did to Mr. Gold's outstanding Disney thread. No offense meant and none taken. Let's enjoy the music, and if ever I come across the rare Herrmann tracks, you'll be the first to hear me holler.