From dathead2 at gmail.com Fri Feb 1 13:58:41 2008 From: dathead2 at gmail.com (Dat Head) Date: Fri Feb 1 13:58:47 2008 Subject: [Flac] problems with 24 bit recording (Edirol R-09 > flac > audacity) Message-ID: <5c01594c0802011358j796d2c03odfe7306802e7f4f7@mail.gmail.com> Roland Edirol R-09 recording at 24/44 (not sure of R-09 f/w version) when going from wav to flac using flac v1.2.1 you get: WARNING: legacy WAVE file has format type 1 but bits-per-sample=24 flac s/w is probably right here and Edirol is not setting bit properly, anyway to twiddle it?) then if you use audacity 1.3.2beta to edit the flac file it shows up all screwed up - don't panic (like I did!), you can just go from flac to wav again then edit the wav. not sure if this is due to the "type 1" thing or not? anybody have any ideas? From dathead2 at gmail.com Fri Feb 1 14:02:24 2008 From: dathead2 at gmail.com (Dat Head) Date: Fri Feb 1 14:02:31 2008 Subject: [Flac] p.s. on 24bit edirol/flac/audacity post Message-ID: <5c01594c0802011402p36017eb1p87a4e0b7e69117ca@mail.gmail.com> here is shntool info output for wav file: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- file name: set3-24bit.wav handled by: wav format module length: 45:08.927 WAVE format: 0x0001 (Microsoft PCM) channels: 2 bits/sample: 24 samples/sec: 44100 average bytes/sec: 264600 rate (calculated): 264600 block align: 6 header size: 44 bytes data size: 716782080 bytes chunk size: 716782116 bytes total size (chunk size + 8): 716782124 bytes actual file size: 716782124 file is compressed: no compression ratio: 1.0000 CD-quality properties: CD quality: no cut on sector boundary: n/a sector misalignment: n/a long enough to be burned: n/a WAVE properties: non-canonical header: no extra RIFF chunks: no Possible problems: file contains ID3v2 tag: no data chunk block-aligned: yes inconsistent header: no file probably truncated: no junk appended to file: no odd data size has pad byte: n/a From rappard at dds.nl Fri Feb 1 14:13:22 2008 From: rappard at dds.nl (rappard@dds.nl) Date: Fri Feb 1 14:13:36 2008 Subject: [Flac] problems with 24 bit recording (Edirol R-09 > flac > audacity) In-Reply-To: <5c01594c0802011358j796d2c03odfe7306802e7f4f7@mail.gmail.com> References: <5c01594c0802011358j796d2c03odfe7306802e7f4f7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080201231322.rlnx2441csscg8kw@webmail.dds.nl> I get the same problem when converting Edirol 24/48-files; I bought mine around a month ago, so I'm assuming the installed firmware is fairly recent. > Roland Edirol R-09 recording at 24/44 (not sure of R-09 f/w version) > > when going from wav to flac using flac v1.2.1 you get: > WARNING: legacy WAVE file has format type 1 but bits-per-sample=24 > flac s/w is probably right here and Edirol is not setting bit properly, > anyway to twiddle it?) > > then if you use audacity 1.3.2beta to edit the flac file it shows up > all screwed up - don't panic (like I did!), you can just go from flac > to wav again then edit the wav. not sure if this is due to the "type 1" > thing or not? > > anybody have any ideas? > _______________________________________________ > Flac mailing list > Flac@xiph.org > http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac > From xflac at yahoo.com Thu Feb 7 22:14:00 2008 From: xflac at yahoo.com (Josh Coalson) Date: Thu Feb 7 22:14:17 2008 Subject: [FLAC] Nullsoft winamp's FLAC plugin In-Reply-To: <57e7ed590801240714q3166ab91sd68b2c326c11369e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <863890.82954.qm@web60424.mail.yahoo.com> --- Harry Sack wrote: > Hi, > > Does anybody know if the FLAC plugin of Nullsoft winamp (the one > included > with winamp itself, not the one you can download on the FLAC website) > uses the reference FLAC decoder? it does. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From rappard at dds.nl Fri Feb 8 00:01:09 2008 From: rappard at dds.nl (rappard@dds.nl) Date: Fri Feb 8 00:01:19 2008 Subject: [Flac] how to get flac fingerprint from a wav? In-Reply-To: <044801c8647c$e09d32e0$0c01a8c0@H9> References: <044801c8647c$e09d32e0$0c01a8c0@H9> Message-ID: <20080208090109.o54oyiqoockwc4gg@webmail.dds.nl> > In windows command line: > > I have a wav file and would like to see what the flac fingerprint would be. > > To do this I run flac to encode the wav file and write the flac file to the > hard disk. I then run metaflac to read the flac file and display the > fingerprint. > > Is there an existing way or other utility to do this without generating the > flac file on the hard disk. I would think it could be quicker and save time > without writing the flac file to the hard disk. Can't you generate the st5 file for the wav file? If I recall correctly st5=ffp for flac files. From brianw at sounds.wa.com Fri Feb 8 01:41:28 2008 From: brianw at sounds.wa.com (Brian Willoughby) Date: Fri Feb 8 01:41:44 2008 Subject: [Flac] how to get flac fingerprint from a wav? In-Reply-To: <20080208090109.o54oyiqoockwc4gg@webmail.dds.nl> References: <044801c8647c$e09d32e0$0c01a8c0@H9> <20080208090109.o54oyiqoockwc4gg@webmail.dds.nl> Message-ID: Great info. I found some descriptions of st5 (md5 fp) and ffp, where I assume that "fp" is just a Taper abbreviation for "fingerprint" - or signature as it's called in the flac header. However, I could not find these utilities or source code. What I found looked like instructions for a gui-based program. I think it would be easier to support Mac if st5 were available as an open source Unix command-line code, which would include Mac OS X. I did a little research, and I am concerned that md5check computes an md5 signature for the entire wav file, not just the audio. Thus it won't compare with the ffp. Apparently, xACT allows you to create the st5 (shn md5) files. But the original poster and I want a command-line solution to create an st5 for comparison against metaflac's report. I think I have xACT, but I don't want to be grabbing the mouse and clicking dialogs when I want to check a whole directory of file signatures. Any Tapers around? Maybe someone can clarify this for us newcomers to st5. Brian On Feb 8, 2008, at 00:01, rappard@dds.nl wrote: > I have a wav file and would like to see what the flac fingerprint > would be. > > To do this I run flac to encode the wav file and write the flac > file to the > hard disk. I then run metaflac to read the flac file and display the > fingerprint. > > Is there an existing way or other utility to do this without > generating the > flac file on the hard disk. I would think it could be quicker and > save time > without writing the flac file to the hard disk. Can't you generate the st5 file for the wav file? If I recall correctly st5=ffp for flac files. From brianw at sounds.wa.com Fri Feb 8 01:42:23 2008 From: brianw at sounds.wa.com (Brian Willoughby) Date: Fri Feb 8 01:42:26 2008 Subject: [Flac] how to get flac fingerprint from a wav? In-Reply-To: <044801c8647c$e09d32e0$0c01a8c0@H9> References: <044801c8647c$e09d32e0$0c01a8c0@H9> Message-ID: Jeff, The MD5 signature is computed from the unencoded audio data, so you do not need any FLAC code to generate it from a wav file. But I don't think there is any existing utility to compute this value. Most MD5 utilities look at the entire file, not just the audio data. So you would need some code that can open a wav file, isolate the audio samples, and compute the MD5 signature. I believe that the bit depth and number of channels has no bearing on the signature, because MD5 just looks at a sequence of bytes. This means a very simple program could handle it without complete wav format parsing. Just a chunk reader looking for 'data' and then printing the MD5 result. You are correct that it would be much faster not to do the compression, especially since the uncompressed audio is all that is needed. Perhaps someone could write a small program that would live in the 'examples' directory of the flac source code, and use the MD5 subroutine from libFLAC. Sorry for the [flac-dev] answer on the [flac] list. Brian Willoughby Sound Consulting On Jan 31, 2008, at 18:48, Jeff wrote: In windows command line: I have a wav file and would like to see what the flac fingerprint would be. To do this I run flac to encode the wav file and write the flac file to the hard disk. I then run metaflac to read the flac file and display the fingerprint. Is there an existing way or other utility to do this without generating the flac file on the hard disk. I would think it could be quicker and save time without writing the flac file to the hard disk. From rappard at dds.nl Fri Feb 8 02:05:06 2008 From: rappard at dds.nl (rappard@dds.nl) Date: Fri Feb 8 02:05:18 2008 Subject: [Flac] how to get flac fingerprint from a wav? In-Reply-To: References: <044801c8647c$e09d32e0$0c01a8c0@H9> <20080208090109.o54oyiqoockwc4gg@webmail.dds.nl> Message-ID: <20080208110506.0e7x0gjig48w0s8s@webmail.dds.nl> shntool (http://etree.org/shnutils/, http://shnutils.freeshell.org/) is Windows-only, but the source is available. > Great info. I found some descriptions of st5 (md5 fp) and ffp, where I > assume that "fp" is just a Taper abbreviation for "fingerprint" - or > signature as it's called in the flac header. However, I could not find > these utilities or source code. What I found looked like instructions > for a gui-based program. I think it would be easier to support Mac if > st5 were available as an open source Unix command-line code, which > would include Mac OS X. > > I did a little research, and I am concerned that md5check computes an > md5 signature for the entire wav file, not just the audio. Thus it > won't compare with the ffp. > > Apparently, xACT allows you to create the st5 (shn md5) files. But the > original poster and I want a command-line solution to create an st5 for > comparison against metaflac's report. I think I have xACT, but I don't > want to be grabbing the mouse and clicking dialogs when I want to check > a whole directory of file signatures. > > Any Tapers around? Maybe someone can clarify this for us newcomers to st5. > > Brian > > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 00:01, rappard@dds.nl wrote: >> I have a wav file and would like to see what the flac fingerprint would be. >> >> To do this I run flac to encode the wav file and write the flac file to the >> hard disk. I then run metaflac to read the flac file and display the >> fingerprint. >> >> Is there an existing way or other utility to do this without generating the >> flac file on the hard disk. I would think it could be quicker and save time >> without writing the flac file to the hard disk. > Can't you generate the st5 file for the wav file? If I recall correctly > st5=ffp for flac files. From drjibe at netwiz.net Fri Feb 8 01:58:39 2008 From: drjibe at netwiz.net (Jeff) Date: Fri Feb 8 02:12:40 2008 Subject: [Flac] how to get flac fingerprint from a wav? In-Reply-To: <20080208090109.o54oyiqoockwc4gg@webmail.dds.nl> Message-ID: <021e01c86a39$2f446230$0c01a8c0@H9> Thanks for all the responses to my question. I think I can use shntool hash option for my project I did not find in the shntool documentation or flac documentation that the hash or st5 always would match the flac fingerprint. But at least in a couple tests I did they matched. And I found some more comments around the internet indicating they were the same. -----Original Message----- From: rappard@dds.nl [mailto:rappard@dds.nl] Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 12:01 AM To: Jeff Cc: Flac@xiph.org Subject: Re: [Flac] how to get flac fingerprint from a wav? > In windows command line: > > I have a wav file and would like to see what the flac fingerprint would be. > > To do this I run flac to encode the wav file and write the flac file to the > hard disk. I then run metaflac to read the flac file and display the > fingerprint. > > Is there an existing way or other utility to do this without generating the > flac file on the hard disk. I would think it could be quicker and save time > without writing the flac file to the hard disk. Can't you generate the st5 file for the wav file? If I recall correctly st5=ffp for flac files. From brianw at sounds.wa.com Fri Feb 8 02:18:32 2008 From: brianw at sounds.wa.com (Brian Willoughby) Date: Fri Feb 8 02:18:55 2008 Subject: [Flac] how to get flac fingerprint from a wav? In-Reply-To: <20080208110506.0e7x0gjig48w0s8s@webmail.dds.nl> References: <044801c8647c$e09d32e0$0c01a8c0@H9> <20080208090109.o54oyiqoockwc4gg@webmail.dds.nl> <20080208110506.0e7x0gjig48w0s8s@webmail.dds.nl> Message-ID: Thanks! shntool is actually compatible with Windows, Unix, and Mac OS X. They only make the Windows binary available for easy download. However, in just a matter of seconds, I was able to download, build, and install shntool for Mac OS X. Works like a charm. Gotta love open source. P.S. I contributed to shorten, so technically I "paid" for this open source. ;-) I was able to generate a shntool hash for a wav file, then compress it with flac and confirm that the signatures matched after running metaflac --show-md5 Thanks for asking this question, Jeff. You've probably saved me some time with my backups. I generally run flac and then cmp the files to make sure my current file matches my backup, but that sometimes gives a false failure report. Now I can just use shntool hash on the uncompressed file and metaflac --show-md5 on the optical backup, and be good. Brian Willoughby Sound Consulting On Feb 8, 2008, at 02:05, rappard@dds.nl wrote: shntool (http://etree.org/shnutils/, http://shnutils.freeshell.org/) is Windows-only, but the source is available. From brianw at sounds.wa.com Fri Feb 8 02:21:40 2008 From: brianw at sounds.wa.com (Brian Willoughby) Date: Fri Feb 8 02:21:50 2008 Subject: [Flac] how to get flac fingerprint from a wav? In-Reply-To: <021e01c86a39$2f446230$0c01a8c0@H9> References: <021e01c86a39$2f446230$0c01a8c0@H9> Message-ID: <3608C6E2-77C8-4F03-8658-890518EB8FB3@sounds.wa.com> I don't think you'll find any mention of other programs in the documentation. What is important is that both signatures (fingerprints) are calculated on the uncompressed audio only. Both documentations mention this fact. They would not match if the compressed audio were used, and they would not match if the entire file were fingerprinted because the headers outside the audio data could easily differ (especially if you flac archive a bwf and restore to wav - they sound identical, but the headers are changed). Brian Willoughby Sound Consulting On Feb 8, 2008, at 01:58, Jeff wrote: I did not find in the shntool documentation or flac documentation that the hash or st5 always would match the flac fingerprint. But at least in a couple tests I did they matched. And I found some more comments around the internet indicating they were the same. From pantor at painter-decorator.eu Fri Feb 8 04:47:06 2008 From: pantor at painter-decorator.eu (Andrius) Date: Fri Feb 8 05:31:22 2008 Subject: [Flac] 24bits/96Khz encoding in Rhytmobox Message-ID: <47AC4F4A.50305@painter-decorator.eu> Hi, how to adjust Rhytmbox for 24bit/96kHz encoding? Thank you. Andrius From c-b at asu.edu Sun Feb 10 16:03:40 2008 From: c-b at asu.edu (Christopher Brown) Date: Sun Feb 10 16:43:33 2008 Subject: [Flac] Replay-gain Message-ID: <200802101703.41284.c-b@asu.edu> Hi List, Is there a way to correctly use the replay-gain feature on flac files that contain an entire album (i.e., multiple tracks with seekpoints added from a cue sheet)? -- Chris From py.thoulon at gmail.com Mon Feb 11 04:04:25 2008 From: py.thoulon at gmail.com (Pyt) Date: Mon Feb 11 04:04:32 2008 Subject: [Flac] Replay-gain In-Reply-To: <200802101703.41284.c-b@asu.edu> References: <200802101703.41284.c-b@asu.edu> Message-ID: Can you elaborate on what you mean by "correctly use" ? Thanks, Pyt. On Feb 11, 2008 1:03 AM, Christopher Brown wrote: > Hi List, > > Is there a way to correctly use the replay-gain feature on flac files that > contain an entire album (i.e., multiple tracks with seekpoints added from > a > cue sheet)? > > -- > Chris > _______________________________________________ > Flac mailing list > Flac@xiph.org > http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac/attachments/20080211/20980cb1/attachment.html From didier.eggerickx at skynet.be Mon Feb 11 04:52:17 2008 From: didier.eggerickx at skynet.be (Didier Eggerickx) Date: Mon Feb 11 05:02:49 2008 Subject: [Flac] Curious Message-ID: <002001c86cac$eeb05f50$0264a8c0@rock> Hello Flac Boys! I've a little thing, without consequences, I try to understand since last evening; I will try to resume it clearly : You must know that I create an NTFS partition, for only coding my CD's in FLAC (for home using) and in MP3 (for car using). My partition inculudes some directories called WAV, FLAC and MP3, amongst others, for personal and paranoiac purposes (double extractions on two different Plextor, and so on...). When I encode a file contained in the WAV directory (after adapting the tags in the configurator of the FLAC frontend), the FLAC produced in the FLAC directory HAS A TITLE (taken, of course, in the part of the filename following the -). If I now, copy the WAV file in the root directory of my partition, encoding it with the same tags configuration, and the FLAC also produced in the root directory, it has NO TITLE (artist name, comments, year, etc...are always there, ONLY the title is missing). Who can explain me that??? I work with the original 1.1.2 FLAC version. Thanks, Progressive La Religion Est Le Ferment De La B?tise Humaine O? Quand Certains Confondent Tol?rance Et Permissivit? Et Veulent Para?tre Plus Humanistes Que Leur Voisin Fut-Il M?me Assis A Leur Gauche.... E-Mail : didier.eggerickx@skynet.be -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac/attachments/20080211/8cfad959/attachment.html From c-b at asu.edu Mon Feb 11 06:40:42 2008 From: c-b at asu.edu (Christopher Brown) Date: Mon Feb 11 06:40:49 2008 Subject: [Flac] Replay-gain In-Reply-To: References: <200802101703.41284.c-b@asu.edu> Message-ID: <200802110740.42434.c-b@asu.edu> On Monday 11 February 2008 05:04:25 Pyt wrote: > Can you elaborate on what you mean by "correctly use" ? > > On Feb 11, 2008 1:03 AM, Christopher Brown wrote: > > Is there a way to correctly use the replay-gain feature on flac files > > that contain an entire album (i.e., multiple tracks with seekpoints added > > from a > > cue sheet)? As I understand it, flac generates replay-gain values for each flac file that you pass (it assumes they are each a track and that they comprise an album), along with album values. If you pass a flac file that contains an entire album (multiple tracks), it treats it as an album with only a single track. In other words, flac's replay-gain feature doesn't seem to know about cue sheets and/or multiple tracks in a single flac file. I would like to use replay-gain to equate each track, which is what I meant by 'correctly use'. Of course, I may be completely mistaken on several fronts. -- Chris From py.thoulon at gmail.com Mon Feb 11 07:32:39 2008 From: py.thoulon at gmail.com (Pyt) Date: Mon Feb 11 07:32:44 2008 Subject: [Flac] Replay-gain In-Reply-To: <200802110740.42434.c-b@asu.edu> References: <200802101703.41284.c-b@asu.edu> <200802110740.42434.c-b@asu.edu> Message-ID: Got it. I do the same (full CD to single FLAC file), and I don't use the track replay gain, but for the cases where I had a need for it, I used Foobar2000 to process the FLAC file and generate the track replay gain. I don't know that FLAC can natively generate track replay gains based on a cue sheet, but somebody might know better... Pyt. On Feb 11, 2008 3:40 PM, Christopher Brown wrote: > > As I understand it, flac generates replay-gain values for each flac file > that > you pass (it assumes they are each a track and that they comprise an > album), > along with album values. If you pass a flac file that contains an entire > album (multiple tracks), it treats it as an album with only a single > track. > > In other words, flac's replay-gain feature doesn't seem to know about cue > sheets and/or multiple tracks in a single flac file. I would like to use > replay-gain to equate each track, which is what I meant by 'correctly > use'. > > Of course, I may be completely mistaken on several fronts. > > -- > Chris > _______________________________________________ > Flac mailing list > Flac@xiph.org > http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac/attachments/20080211/ca49d857/attachment.htm From justivo at gmail.com Mon Feb 11 10:34:15 2008 From: justivo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ivo_Emanuel_Gon=C3=A7alves?=) Date: Mon Feb 11 10:34:23 2008 Subject: [Flac] What is the magic code for Ogg FLAC? Message-ID: Hello, I just noticed that ogginfo is not properly detecting Ogg FLAC files. To fix the issue I will need to know what is the correct magic for Ogg FLAC and how big are the packet bytes. Please advise. -Ivo From xflac at yahoo.com Mon Feb 11 10:39:06 2008 From: xflac at yahoo.com (Josh Coalson) Date: Mon Feb 11 10:46:15 2008 Subject: [Flac] What is the magic code for Ogg FLAC? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <875378.22491.qm@web65414.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves wrote: > Hello, > > I just noticed that ogginfo is not properly detecting Ogg FLAC files. > To fix the issue I will need to know what is the correct magic for > Ogg FLAC and how big are the packet bytes. > > Please advise. I think everything you need is here: http://flac.sourceforge.net/ogg_mapping.html let me know if that doesn't have enough info. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From justivo at gmail.com Mon Feb 11 11:05:32 2008 From: justivo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ivo_Emanuel_Gon=C3=A7alves?=) Date: Mon Feb 11 11:05:41 2008 Subject: [Flac] What is the magic code for Ogg FLAC? In-Reply-To: <875378.22491.qm@web65414.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <875378.22491.qm@web65414.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 2/11/08, Josh Coalson wrote: > let me know if that doesn't have enough info. I'd say it had enough info, but too much for what I needed. I ended up finding the answer in oggenc/flac.c: it's "\177FLAC" not "fLaC" as ogginfo claimed. Is this right, Josh? While my patched ogginfo now detects Ogg FLAC properly, I'm not sure if this is the correct method. ogginfo only checks for magic and packet size. -Ivo From martin.leese at stanfordalumni.org Mon Feb 11 11:44:23 2008 From: martin.leese at stanfordalumni.org (Martin Leese) Date: Mon Feb 11 11:44:29 2008 Subject: [Flac] What is the magic code for Ogg FLAC? Message-ID: Josh Coalson wrote: > I think everything you need is here: > http://flac.sourceforge.net/ogg_mapping.html " Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves " wrote: > I'd say it had enough info, but too much for what I needed. I ended > up finding the answer in oggenc/flac.c: it's "\177FLAC" not "fLaC" as > ogginfo claimed. > > Is this right, Josh? While my patched ogginfo now detects Ogg FLAC > properly, I'm not sure if this is the correct method. ogginfo only > checks for magic and packet size. I am not Josh, but this looks straightforward. >From http://flac.sourceforge.net/ogg_mapping.html: Version 1.0 of the FLAC-to-Ogg mapping then is a simple identifying header followed by pure native FLAC data, as follows: * The first packet of a stream consists of: o The one-byte packet type 0x7F o The four-byte ASCII signature "FLAC", i.e. 0x46, 0x4C, 0x41, 0x43 As 0x7F = \177, yes this is right. Regards, Martin -- Martin J Leese E-mail: martin.leese Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/ From brianw at sounds.wa.com Mon Feb 11 14:55:08 2008 From: brianw at sounds.wa.com (Brian Willoughby) Date: Mon Feb 11 14:55:21 2008 Subject: [Flac] Replay-gain In-Reply-To: <200802110740.42434.c-b@asu.edu> References: <200802101703.41284.c-b@asu.edu> <200802110740.42434.c-b@asu.edu> Message-ID: Chris, You should be careful what you ask for. Unless there is silence between every track, multiple replay gain values during playback will cause an abrupt volume change at the track marker, depending upon how the player implements replay gain. You may have a collection of CDs where there is always silence between tracks, but many CDs have a few songs that bleed together, perhaps even the entire album is one continuous piece. Computing separate replay gain values on a group of tracks that are together in one file can backfire on you in certain cases. Another thing to consider is that nearly 100% of albums are mastered so that all the songs have compatible volume levels. This is another reason to treat the entire CD with one replay gain. The mastering engineer may make the entire CD louder or softer than average, but the individual songs should already be matched. Of course, there are exceptions. A greatest hits CD or especially an unauthorized collection of songs probably won't be mastered correctly due to laziness or lack of budget. i.e. There is not one "correct use" for all CDs. Brian Willoughby Sound Consulting On Feb 11, 2008, at 06:40, Christopher Brown wrote: > On Feb 11, 2008 1:03 AM, Christopher Brown wrote: >> Is there a way to correctly use the replay-gain feature on flac files >> that contain an entire album (i.e., multiple tracks with >> seekpoints added >> from a >> cue sheet)? As I understand it, flac generates replay-gain values for each flac file that you pass (it assumes they are each a track and that they comprise an album), along with album values. If you pass a flac file that contains an entire album (multiple tracks), it treats it as an album with only a single track. In other words, flac's replay-gain feature doesn't seem to know about cue sheets and/or multiple tracks in a single flac file. I would like to use replay-gain to equate each track, which is what I meant by 'correctly use'. Of course, I may be completely mistaken on several fronts. -- Chris From rudygs at hotmail.com Tue Feb 12 16:24:27 2008 From: rudygs at hotmail.com (Rudy S.) Date: Tue Feb 12 16:25:05 2008 Subject: [Flac] flac encoder In-Reply-To: <20080212200003.02AEB1CEFE@mail.xiph.org> References: <20080212200003.02AEB1CEFE@mail.xiph.org> Message-ID: just curious, is there a difference between the flac encoder from WINAMP and from flac front end encoder via EAC? thanks. Rudy _________________________________________________________________ Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging.?You IM, we give. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join From cms0009 at gmail.com Fri Feb 15 13:59:11 2008 From: cms0009 at gmail.com (Richard) Date: Fri Feb 15 13:59:23 2008 Subject: [Flac] re-flac files /with Message-ID: <200802151659.11742.cms0009@gmail.com> Have about 200 flac files, that DON'T have replay-gain tags.. I would just like to ? re-encode them with replay-gain tags? if possible if possible what command line string would work? Thanks in Advance Richard From justivo at gmail.com Fri Feb 15 15:43:42 2008 From: justivo at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ivo_Emanuel_Gon=C3=A7alves?=) Date: Fri Feb 15 15:43:49 2008 Subject: [Flac] re-flac files /with In-Reply-To: <200802151659.11742.cms0009@gmail.com> References: <200802151659.11742.cms0009@gmail.com> Message-ID: You don't need to re-encode them all just to add ReplayGain. If you are in Windows, one software you can use is foobar2000, which has a component that allows easy addition of RG tags. -Ivo From martin.leese at stanfordalumni.org Sun Feb 17 19:11:11 2008 From: martin.leese at stanfordalumni.org (Martin Leese) Date: Sun Feb 17 19:11:36 2008 Subject: [Flac] Address munging in pipermail Message-ID: This link has appeared in Google: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac/2008-February.txt This file contains e-mail addresses en claire (in the clear). Addresses in the headers are munged, but not in the body. This is strange because this never used to happen. I regularly search Google for my e-mail address, and such lists have never shown up before. Also, in the archive, e-mail addresses in the body of messages are munged. See for example: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac/2008-February/001226.html Does anybody know what has changed? Many thanks, Martin -- Martin J Leese Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/ From xflac at yahoo.com Wed Feb 20 22:49:10 2008 From: xflac at yahoo.com (Josh Coalson) Date: Wed Feb 20 22:49:16 2008 Subject: [Flac] flac encoder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <233641.39190.qm@web65408.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- "Rudy S." wrote: > > just curious, > is there a difference between the flac encoder from WINAMP and from > flac front end encoder via EAC? yes, the winamp flac encoder uses flake (an alternate flac encoder) which I recommend not to use because it can generate out-of-spec files. at least don't encode with its highest setting. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping From xflac at yahoo.com Wed Feb 20 22:51:16 2008 From: xflac at yahoo.com (Josh Coalson) Date: Wed Feb 20 22:51:28 2008 Subject: [Flac] re-flac files /with In-Reply-To: <200802151659.11742.cms0009@gmail.com> Message-ID: <731451.75356.qm@web65416.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> --- Richard wrote: > Have about 200 flac files, that DON'T have replay-gain tags.. > I would just like to ? re-encode them with replay-gain tags? if > possible if possible what command line string would work? you can use metaflac on an album's worth of tracks: metaflac --add-replay-gain *.flac http://flac.sourceforge.net/documentation_tools_metaflac.html#metaflac_shorthand_add_replay_gain ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping From ncw33 at cam.ac.uk Fri Feb 15 14:02:20 2008 From: ncw33 at cam.ac.uk (Nicholas Wilson) Date: Wed Feb 20 22:53:30 2008 Subject: [Flac] re-flac files /with In-Reply-To: <200802151659.11742.cms0009@gmail.com> References: <200802151659.11742.cms0009@gmail.com> Message-ID: <200802152202.20069.ncw33@cam.ac.uk> On Friday 15 February 2008 9:59 pm Richard wrote: > Have about 200 flac files, that DON'T have replay-gain tags.. > I would just like to ? re-encode them with replay-gain tags? if possible > if possible what command line string would work? > > Thanks in Advance > Richard find . -type f -name \*flac -print -execdir metaflac --add-replay-gain {} + in the top directory should do it (this will apply album gain to all the files in each directory). Nicholas From aarelovich at gmail.com Fri Feb 22 10:41:55 2008 From: aarelovich at gmail.com (Ariel Arelovich) Date: Fri Feb 22 10:41:59 2008 Subject: [Flac] =?iso-8859-1?q?Ariel_te_envi=F3_una_invitaci=F3n_para_que?= =?iso-8859-1?q?_seas_su_amigo_en_Tagged=2E=2E=2E?= Message-ID: <20080222184156.84A7AA450C@hemlock.osuosl.org> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac/attachments/20080222/3618949b/attachment.html From david.schwartz at wachoviasec.com Fri Feb 22 12:03:10 2008 From: david.schwartz at wachoviasec.com (david.schwartz@wachoviasec.com) Date: Fri Feb 22 12:29:59 2008 Subject: [Flac] David Schwartz is out of the office. Message-ID: I will be out of the office starting 02/22/2008 and will not return until 02/25/2008. I will reply to your message when I return Monday, February 25th. For MSRB / TRACE / OATS issues please call the Trade Reporting Control main number: 804-344-6216. For issues requiring escalation please contact Ralph Brugueras: 804-344-6515. Thank you. ATTENTION: Please be aware that since the confidentiality of Internet email cannot be guaranteed, do not include private or confidential information such as passwords, account numbers, social security numbers, etc., in emails to us. Additionally, instructions having financial consequences such as trade orders, funds transfer, etc., should not be included in your email communications to us as we cannot act on such instructions received by email. If you do not wish to receive advertising messages from Wachovia, please use the following link to unsubscribe: https://www.wachovia.com/email/unsubscribe Or you may write us at Wachovia Securities 901 East Byrd Street Richmond, VA 23219. For additional information regarding our electronic communication policies please go to http://www.wachoviasec.com/gotoEmailDisclosure Investments in securities and insurance products are: NOT FDIC-INSURED/NOT BANK-GUARANTEED/MAY LOSE VALUE Wachovia Securities is the trade name used by two separate, registered broker-dealers and nonbank affiliates of Wachovia Corporation providing certain retail securities brokerage services: Wachovia Securities, LLC, Member NYSE/SIPC, and Wachovia Securities Financial Network, LLC, Member FINRA/SIPC. From cdheaven14 at yahoo.com Wed Feb 27 04:20:23 2008 From: cdheaven14 at yahoo.com (ALLAN SMITH) Date: Wed Feb 27 04:20:30 2008 Subject: [Flac] FLAC PROBLEM Message-ID: <850687.58422.qm@web35512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> When I install the Flac program and then try to open it I get this message:: Component 'MSCOMCTL.OCX' or one of its dependencies not correctly registered: a file is missing or invalid. I have tried installing the Flac program about 20 times and every time I get the same message. Does anyone have any idea what this means? I can be contacted at CDHEAVEN14@YAHOO.COM Thanks in advance Allan CDHEAVEN14@YAHOO.COM --------------------------------- Rise to the challenge for Sport Relief with Yahoo! for Good -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac/attachments/20080227/027e7fe8/attachment.htm From rappard at dds.nl Wed Feb 27 04:29:41 2008 From: rappard at dds.nl (rappard@dds.nl) Date: Wed Feb 27 04:29:50 2008 Subject: [Flac] FLAC PROBLEM In-Reply-To: <850687.58422.qm@web35512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <850687.58422.qm@web35512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20080227132941.n1jv10obkkckw0sw@webmail.dds.nl> > When I install the Flac program and then try to open it I get this message:: > > Component 'MSCOMCTL.OCX' or one of its dependencies not correctly > registered: a file is missing or invalid. > > I have tried installing the Flac program about 20 times and every > time I get the same message. > Does anyone have any idea what this means? > I can be contacted at CDHEAVEN14@YAHOO.COM Google is your friend: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-us%3AIE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7IBMA&q=flac+mscomctl.ocx