Reconsider ISO posting policy?

[PencilGeek]

As U2Lynne knows, I'm the original taper of many shows -- spanning 30 years. All of my shows are the master recordings.

Many of these shows are worthy of being mastered as DVD-Audio in addition to the standard CD-Audio. We tried releasing Stevie Wonder @ Greek Theater as DVD-Audio, and it eventually got pulled because too many people complained they couldn't play it. It was presumed the posting was in error, but after looking into this, I don't think the posting was at fault. I believe the posting was fine.

I have two DVD-Audio players: My primary Denon 3910, and my secondary Onkyo DV-SP800.

I've been debugging this for three days now, and here's what I've discovered.

My DVD-Audio mastering software will play the DVD-Audio on either of these machines. However, if I use the AUDIO_TS files themselves and use NERO to burn, the DVD-A will play fine on my Denon, but won't play at all on my Onkyo. Next I tested a NERO DVD-COPY operation instead, and that works fine. So that eliminates at least one category of bugs in NERO. Next I burned the ISO, and that worked every single time without failure.

Following these experiments, I used some DVD diagnostics software to try and get a technical view of how the disc was encoded, and then I duplicated that exact scheme with NERO options -- guess what -- it didn't work. I then searched the web and found many older DVD players had problems unless the disc was encoded as UDF-1.02 file system, instead of any of the newer UDF versions (this DVD-A is encoded as UDF). So I tried overriding the default UDF encoding in NERO and forced it to burn at 1.02 -- it didn't work.

So it would appear the only guaranteed method to ensure the disc plays on the widest variety of players, is by burning the ISO file itself. The ISO file was guaranteed to run on any player.

So now, what do we do at TTD? I'd like to distribute some of my most worthy shows as DVD-A, but I don't want another fiasco of people complaining they can't play it -- all because whatever software they're using doesn't set whatever options are necessary to burn the disc properly.

I would propose that TTD break new ground here, and allow ISO file posting under strict guidelines. For example, only allow them from trusted traders; only allow them for DVD-A; and only allow them when the trusted trader is the original taper. You'd basically be trusting them at their word; but you know who these people are, and you know whether or not you can trust them (use your judgement). I'm personally only interested in making my own shows available; I have no interest in posting anything else, by anybody else, found or traded by any other means. I only want to post my own stuff.

You could also set up a 'moderated' posting policy for DVD-A ISO files. Postings would be submitted and seeded by the original author. You guys burn them to a VIRTUAL DVD drive and check that the contents match the fingerprints supplied by the author. You'd be getting so few of these that I don't think this would be too much of a burden.

So what do you say? Ready to break new ground and give yourselves a leg up on your competition? Here's your chance.

/PG

[U2Lynne]

I did find it unfortunate that the show didn't seem to burn properly. Did anyone on the torrent manage to get it to burn properly? This was the first DVD-A that was seeded as an AUDIO_TS folder - I think the others were VIDEO_TS folders (show 1, show 2, show 3, show 4, show 5). I wonder if that is the difference that made them burnable and playable?

I have brought this thread up in Staff to get some opinions on allowing this in this particular instance.

[PencilGeek]

I did find it unfortunate that the show didn't seem to burn properly. Did anyone on the torrent manage to get it to burn properly? This was the first DVD-A that was seeded as an AUDIO_TS folder - I think the others were VIDEO_TS folders

It's my impression...and it's only an impression...that audio files burned as VIDIO_TS are essentially movies without a motion picture, and that the authoring software compresses the audio into AC3, Dolby Digital, or something like that.

I have DVD-Architect, and that's about as high-end consumer software as you can get for burning DVDs. When you use DVD-Architect for creating such a project, it doesn't give you a choice: you must compress the audio into the VIDIO_TS folders. I'll look into this again...but that's the whole reason I bought another $600 software package (WaveLab) -- just so it wouldn't compress my audio.

/PG

[Tubular]

I can see why you want to seed an .iso file for DVD-A if you have made a menu or surround sound. But if they are stereo and with no menu why not just seed 24 bit FLACs? The FLACs could be checked in spectral much easier than if the audio was in .AOB files. Also the FLACs are compressed, so they take less time to seed and download. The .AOBs will contain uncompressed audio unless MLP is used, and an MLP encoder costs big bucks. They can author their own DVD-As with DVD-Audiofile (available free here: http://24bit.turtleside.com) or with Disc Welder. I guess it would be a problem for Mac users who don't have DVD-A authoring software available, though. Also, time must be spent authoring the DVD-A. There are advantages and disadvantages to seeding FLACs vs. an authored DVD-A is I guess what I'm saying.

Also, if the shows are 16/48, 24/48 or 24/96 they should be authored and seeded as DVD-Video if they are going to be authored for DVD IMO. Most people have a DVD-V player, not a DVD-A/V player, so for maximum compatibility for playback and no quality loss DVD-V would work better IMO. And DVD-V can be seeded with no need to use an .iso file.

Just my 2 cents.

[Tubular]

Didn't see your last post. Audio DVD Creator will create audio only DVD-Vs with a menu using uncompressed LPCM at 16/48, 24/48, or 24/96, and it is only $40.
http://www.audio-dvd-creator.com/

[dude87]

I agree the better approach is to seed 24 bit FLAC files. Not everyone has a DVD player capable of playing back DVD Audio (I do, but most people don't) but do play back 24 bit audio from their PCs. By distributing 24 bit FLACs people can either play them from their PC (if that's their choice) or author to DVD Audio discs using DiscWelder, DVD-Architect, or other paid programs or by downloading DVD Audiofile (for Windows systems) or the DVD Audio freeware tools available on Sourceforge (which I have used on Linux very successfully). Both DVD Audiofile and the DVD Audio freeware tools can create ISO images directly from FLAC files, you don't even have to convert first.

This results in audio files that are verifiable (via the FLAC fingerprints) and that can be played back in the most logical manner for the person downloading them (from their PC or by authoring a disc). Using DiscWelder or the DVD Audio tools is pretty straightforward - you don't get fancy menus (depending on your version of DiscWelder, at least) but you get a disc with distinct tracks, no gaps and excellent sound.

[Tubular]

Just to revise my comments, the only reason to seed a DVD-Audio .iso IMO is for lossless surround sound (uncompressed or w/MLP), or for an MLP encoded seed. MLP lossless compression costs about $3000 though: http://www.discwelder.com/low/low_dChrome.htm There may be cheaper programs with MLP, but I'm not sure.

[PencilGeek]

Just to revise my comments, the only reason to seed a DVD-Audio .iso IMO is for lossless surround sound (uncompressed or w/MLP), or for an MLP encoded seed. MLP lossless compression costs about $3000 though: http://www.discwelder.com/low/low_dChrome.htm There may be cheaper programs with MLP, but I'm not sure.

So I'm playing with DVD-Architect v4.5 right now (just released about 1.5 weeks ago). I do see the LPCM option for DVD-V files. Now that I think about it, that option was there all along and now I remember why I didn't use it. At first, I was going to extract a 3.1 or 2.1 version of the show, and LPCM must be stereo -- so I moved over the DVD-Audio instead. But my experiments with 3.1 and 2.1 didn't pan out -- as the result didn't sound better than the original, but instead sounded worse. So I authored in stereo anyways -- which once again allows me to use LPCM for DVD-V.

Now I'm running into a different problem. DVD-Architect seems to project the resulting file at 8.5GB even though the sources are barely over 4.0GB. I know it's thinking I have a video source attached as well (which I don't). So if I can figure out a way to mute the video (or remove the video channel), then I think we'd be golden and get the project size down to 4.5 GB.

Now, regarding FLAC conversion and downloading some other tool to author to DVD-V (Audio). (I apologize in advance if this sounds a little harsh.) I'm not some type of idealists who's releasing my shows because "the music deserves to be free" (I'm a staunch capitalist at heart). I just happen to have been taping since I was 14 years old, and had professional recording gear since I was 18 years old and developed what I consider a very nice and rare collection spanning 30 years -- a collection that very few people know about (consisting mostly of jazz). I don't mind making my shows available to others, but it's going to be on my terms, not somebody else's terms. I essentially make the shows available in a format that I can use at home, and if others can benefit, then they'll get it for free. I also want to ensure the shows I release are in the best possible format, and least likely to be tampered with.

There's no convenient way that I can extract 20+ individual songs out of the original 96/24 WAV files (actually the un-down-sampled originals are even higher than 192/24). Likewise, I have absolutely no interest in getting yet another piece of software just so I can make a plurality of people happy.

Sorry for having to say it like that...but I want to make sure that everybody understands that, as the original taper, I'm doing others the favor by releasing my shows, and it's not incumbent on me to try to please everybody.

With that said as harsh as it even sounds to myself, I think you'd also find me one of the easiest going people you'd ever meet, and willing to give you anything out of my collection you want...without any need to reciprocate.

[direwolf-pgh]

you're the computer guy pencilgeek - figure it out :D

looking forward to some great sounds
thanks in advance

[Tubular]

It's cool, you didn't come off too harsh to me. :) I hope this doesn't sound so harsh though: if you are taping and trading as an amateur, the music doesn't "deserve to be free", it is free. Unless it is sold, then they are sold bootlegs. There is really no way to guarantee that they are not tampered with, but there are rules about seeding unnecessary or bad remasters. I believe the mods have strict rules on this and only allow somone to remaster if they are good and have much experience. I don't think anyone would try to remaster a digital audience recording though. The worst they would do is convert to mp3 for their own personal use, and mp3s can't be seeded here. With FLAC there is just so much more that can be done with them much more easily, and someday there may be disc players that support data FLAC discs. I don't know if any iPod type players support 24/96, but maybe someday. Those 160 gig iPods could fit lots of 24/96 audio. Some of Denon's new receivers support FLAC. If someone only had a 40 kb/s upload connection, they might rather download and upload 2.6 gigs of a FLAC seed than 4.3 gigs of a DVD-Video or DVD-Audio. It's cool though, an authored audio only 24/96 DVD-V is a great thing. :clap: Saves people from buying a $40 program, and authoring time. :thumbsup

With shntool (free: www.etree.org ) you can join the .wav files into one big one without otherwise altering them, and with CD Wave (free: www.etree.org ) you can split them on sector boundaries without otherwise altering them. I don't know the prog DVD-Architect, someone else will have to help out with that.

Thanks for taping and trading, people here will love your seeds! :wave:

Also, and I don't want to start a war :lol , what is your opinion of the Korg MR-1000 5.6 MHz 1-bit recorder vs. something like a Sound Devices 722 or 744 that records natively at 24/96 or 24/192? I have only heard 2.82 MHz SACDs, don't think I've ever heard 5.6 ones. I thought commercial 24/96 DVD-As had the edge, by far. I know there is controversy about which format sounds better. I read something about Sony using "wide DSD" @ 8 bit/high sample rate for recording and transfers because they realize the limitations of 1 bit recordings. I have read that the bit depth is much more significant than the sample rate once you get to about 60kHz or 90kHz; that more people can detect a difference in bit depth than sample rate once you reach about 60 or 90. Personally, I'd like to see companies release 64bit/96kHz AD converters, or 64/192 soon. This is a good read:
http://sound.westhost.com/cd-sacd-dvda.htm

[noir horse]

Which Nero application did you use to burn your test disc mentioned above? I've been playing with Nero 7 this afternoon and was unable to find anyway to burn this as a usable dvd-a, although I was able to listen to the files using Nero Showtime. Thanks.

[dude87]

I've got no issues with you deciding how you want to share your recordings, they're your recordings and you can do whatever you want with them. Personally, when I transfer analog masters to digital I cut the songs into individual tracks first and then author a DVD Audio - it's the easiest way for me to be able to break the DVD Audio disc into individual songs. Also, I can take a higher-resolution analog/digital conversion and then use Audacity to convert to 44.1/16 for regular CD. Once I've created individual WAV files for all the tracks converting them to FLAC is pretty easy. But if that's not how you work that's okay by me.

I've had trouble burning DVD Audio downloads that consist of a AUDIO_TS folder (although I didn't download the Stevie Wonder show you referenced above). I've never had a problem using FLAC files, though, which is why I think it's the best way to go. But that's all IMHO and what works for me.

[Tubular]

dude87, if you need a free prog to dither/resample several .wav files as a batch, r8brain is a great one: http://www.voxengo.com/product/r8brain/

A while ago a guy wanted to convert a 24/96 FLAC seed to 16/44.1 so he could also burn a CD. He used Audacity, and at the end of every converted .wav there was a little bit of silence added, so when he burned the CD there were gaps between tracks. It isn't really a problem if you are resampling/dithering the whole show as one big .wav file, but for a show that has already been split up it sucks, you have to manually delete the silence at the end of each track. :rolleyes:

[PencilGeek]

It's cool, you didn't come off too harsh to me. :) I hope this doesn't sound so harsh though: if you are taping and trading as an amateur, the music doesn't "deserve to be free", it is free. Unless it is sold, then they are sold bootlegs. There is really no way to guarantee that they are not tampered with...

Correction, it's only free if I give it away -- which I've done already for 30 years. Never mind the 20 years I didn't trade anything because I found the attitudes and (tape-trading) politics of too many tape traders rather offensive to my free and giving nature. Having studied audio engineering in college for 3 years, of course I think I'm better at mastering my own stuff and knowing what to do with it than Joe Sixpack -- which is why I don't want Joe scewing with stuff that has my name on it.


Also, and I don't want to start a war :lol , what is your opinion of the Korg MR-1000 5.6 MHz 1-bit recorder vs. something like a Sound Devices 722 or 744 that records natively at 24/96 or 24/192? I have only heard 2.82 MHz SACDs, don't think I've ever heard 5.6 ones...

I don't know if you looked up my previous posts, but I did buy the Kork MR-1000 to replace my Panasonic SV-255. When I was looking, I didn't know about the others you mentioned (and really have only heard of them, haven't looked them up). I did look at many choices and picked the Korg because it provided phantom power to my mics (no more preamps), was really no bigger than my SV-255, had separate DC power rails for mic preamps vs. digital circuitry, and boasted of high-end mic preamps (at least they boasted about them). I really didn't have time to do a full blown comparison between decks because I only had 3 days to find one, and figure out how to make it arrive at my house by a 10AM deliver immediately after a holiday weekend...so I could then drive 400 miles to see a show that evening. If you do the math on the Korg, then the 5.6Mhz DSD encoding is roughly a little higher than 192/24 PCM.

But from what I know of PCM, yes bit depth is really doing to make a huge difference. But that doesn't mean a 1-bit encoding can't accurately be converted to a word-based PCM encoding. After all, when the original music was sampled, they essentially had to put all of the bits into some type of FIFO and convert them from random 1's and 0's to a 24-bit value. And if you think about the problem of doing this operation, it sounds a lot like they had DSD style 1-bit data in the first place and figured out a numerical value to associate with those 24-bits of 1's and 0's. I say that because 1's and 0's don't really have any type of amplitude -- whereas a 24-bit value does represent amplitude.

For the only show I taped with it: sounded absolutely amazing, far better than anything I ever heard from DAT. But part of the credit is owed to the Greek Theater in LA -- because IMO, they've always had great sound as long as I've been going there. I was also sitting 13th row center, which is exactly where I estimate the best sound will be (depending on the theater and distance between the speakers). So this just may have been the perfect storm for the perfect recording: deck, seating, theater, pa system.

/PG

[PencilGeek]

Which Nero application did you use to burn your test disc mentioned above? I've been playing with Nero 7 this afternoon and was unable to find anyway to burn this as a usable dvd-a, although I was able to listen to the files using Nero Showtime. Thanks.

I used NERO-7 Ultra. The original DVD-A's were created using WaveLab6. I also used WL6 to create a separate set of ISO's. The DVD-A's made from the files, using NERO, would play fine on my Denon 3910, but wouldn't play on my Onkyo SP800...no matter what. But anything burned from the ISO (burned with NERO) or copied with NERO worked fine on both machines.

/PG

[PencilGeek]

I've got no issues with you deciding how you want to share your recordings, they're your recordings and you can do whatever you want with them. Personally, when I transfer analog masters to digital I cut the songs into individual tracks first and then author a DVD Audio - it's the easiest way for me to be able to break the DVD Audio disc into individual songs. Also, I can take a higher-resolution analog/digital conversion and then use Audacity to convert to 44.1/16 for regular CD. Once I've created individual WAV files for all the tracks converting them to FLAC is pretty easy. But if that's not how you work that's okay by me.

That's exactly how I do it, and have always done it. But outside of cutting/pasting your regions to individual (new) files, how are you breaking down the songs into individual files? I prefer working with flat files, not individual files consisting of a single song. But I wouldn't mind breaking it up into individual songs from the regions if there were a convenient and relatively painless way to do it.

/PG

[chinajoe]

i wouldnt think it would be a big deal. i take it these files would be able to be converted to wav if we want to take them in the car, portable while biking.

[PencilGeek]

i wouldnt think it would be a big deal. i take it these files would be able to be converted to wav if we want to take them in the car, portable while biking.

You wouldn't need to. For any DVD-Audio I released, I would have already released a CD-Audio (FLAC) version of the same thing. The DVD-Audio would just be a higher quality version of the same thing.

/PG

[Tubular]

I guess the older, free versions of CD Wave can't handle 24 bit files, I just tried it. But the new versions can:
http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=509705
"Track : CD-Wave 1.96.1"

[Tubular]

I'm not a taper but there are lots of 24 bit recorders that will provide real 48 volt phantom power, with no need for a separate preamp, including the SD 722 and 744, Tascam HD-P2, some Edirol models I think. I think the Sound Devices are regarded as the best.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Audio_CD
The process of creating a DSD signal is conceptually similar to taking a 1-bit delta-sigma analog-to-digital (A/D) converter and removing the decimator which converts the 1-bit bitstream into multibit PCM. Instead, the 1-bit signal is recorded directly and in theory only requires a lowpass filter to reconstruct the original analog waveform. In reality it is a little more complex, and the analogy is incomplete in that 1-bit sigma-delta converters are these days rather unusual, one reason being that a 1-bit signal cannot be dithered properly: most modern sigma-delta converters are multibit.

Because of the nature of sigma-delta converters, one cannot make a direct comparison between DSD and PCM. An approximation is possible, though, and would place DSD in some aspects comparable to a PCM format that has a bit depth of 20 bits and a sampling frequency of 192 kHz. PCM sampled at 24 bits provides a (theoretical) additional 24 dB of dynamic range. Due to the effects of quantization noise, the usable bandwidth of the SACD format is approximately 100 kHz, which is similar to 192 kHz PCM.

Because it has been extremely difficult to carry out DSP operations (for example performing EQ, balance, panning and other changes in the digital domain) in a 1-bit environment, and because of the prevalence of studio equipment such as Pro Tools, which is solely PCM-based, the vast majority of SACDs — especially rock and contemporary music which relies on multitrack techniques — are in fact mixed in PCM (or mixed analog and recorded on PCM recorders) and then converted to DSD for SACD mastering.

To address some of these issues, a new studio format has been developed, usually referred to as "DSD-wide", which retains standard DSD's high sample rate but uses an 8-bit, rather than single-bit digital word length, but still relies heavily on the noise shaping principle. It becomes almost the same as PCM (it's sometimes disparagingly referred to as "PCM-narrow") but has the added benefit of making DSP operations in the studio a great deal more practical. The main difference is that "DSD-wide" still retains 2.8224 MHz (64Fs) sampling frequency while the highest frequency in which PCM is being edited is 352.8 kHz (8Fs). The "DSD-wide" signal is down-converted to regular DSD for SACD mastering. As a result of this technique and other developments there are now a few digital audio workstations (DAWs) which operate, or can operate, in the DSD domain, notably Pyramix and some SADiE systems.

It says that a lot of modern AD converters start off as multibit, unlike a lot of older converters that were 1 bit/high sample rate.

From the Swedish article:
One-bit converters for CD-players often use sampling rates between 11 and 50 MHz. The best one-bit converter probably is JVC's PEM-DD and it is much better than DSD. This said with reservation, I might have missed some even better one-bit technology than PEM-DD. But as far as I know this is the technology that comes closest to true multi bit technology in resolution.

The resolution/ information doubles when you double the sampling frequency (it is possible to be more specific, but for this example it is enough). But to double the resolution using PCM, you only have to add one more bit. If you go from 1 to 16 bits (adding 15 bits which use approximately 15 times more storage space), the resolution increases 65,536 times (from one step to 65,536 steps).

There is also another essential difference; the increase in resolution you achieve from raising the sampling frequency will be frequency dependant. A one-bit system will therefore have high resolution at low frequencies (where the information theoretically is low) and have low resolution at high frequencies (where the information theoretically is high).

By the use of noise shaping of high order, it is possible to increase the resolution at "quite high frequencies" at the expense of resolution at very high frequencies, but only for static, non transient signals. Transient signals will have poor resolution in a one-bit system. If the signal does not endure for a long enough time, the error will not be minimised by the noise shaper of the one bit system.

That's why you can read in documents from Burr Brown (who manufactures both one-bit and multi-bit converters) that you should use multi-bit converters for "waveform synthesis applications requiring very low distortion and noise". They have not written this for nothing.

A one-bit converter (i.e. the DSD system) cannot regenerate a short pulse with stringent form. It will change form from moment to moment. Every identical recorded pulse will show up with a new form.

[PencilGeek]

I guess I fell for that troll.

Now, back to the subject of DVD-Audio authoring. Does DVD-V LPCM support 96/24 or is it limited to 48/16?

/PG

[Tubular]

Didn't see your last post. Audio DVD Creator will create audio only DVD-Vs with a menu using uncompressed LPCM at 16/48, 24/48, or 24/96, and it is only $40.
http://www.audio-dvd-creator.com/

Thread hijack, maybe.

But your question was already answered on page 1. ;)

[PencilGeek]

Thread hijack, maybe.

But your question was already answered on page 1. ;)

You know, until I read this, I almost forgot how dumb I was, and why I quit trading my shows for nearly 20 years.

/PG

[Tubular]

You're kidding me, right? Lots of folks seed 24 bit FLACs. It's the trading standard at etree, dime, TTD, elsewhere. I didn't attack you personally or anything, it's just a discussion. Yes DVD-V can handle uncompressed 16/48, 24/48, or 24/96, and that's it, no other uncompressed resolutions. The only lossless compression (smaller sizes, so faster to download and upload) for the DVD format costs 3 grand for the license, but FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Codec) is free. I shouldn't have brought up the DSD vs. PCM thing, that is a different subject. Sorry if I gave you a bad first impression of what The Traders' Den is like. :(

Stick around, once you get the hang of preparing a fileset and seeding it, it is a breeze. :)

I'm not a mod, I have no final say about whether they will allow a DVD-A .iso

[direwolf-pgh]

That's exactly how I do it, and have always done it. But outside of cutting/pasting your regions to individual (new) files, how are you breaking down the songs into individual files? I prefer working with flat files, not individual files consisting of a single song. But I wouldn't mind breaking it up into individual songs from the regions if there were a convenient and relatively painless way to do it.

/PG :wtf: :hmm: what did you use at that audio engineering school you went to?

I'm going to add two cents - cause this thread is killing me.
Everyone is dancing around the question you asked - as to not 'hurt your feelings' - whatever. Id rather give you an honest and direct response.

1. You're using the wrong program to work with audio, attempting to create DVD-A, etc.. IMO.
2. Should any forum change their seeding policy because you're having issues.... um, no.

You are not the first to create a DVD-A or work with higher bitrate files.
You are the first to believe a new seeding policy is needed to deal with these files.

Pencilgeek, why do you believe a new policy is needed ?

[weedwacker]

Here is how I author dvd hybrid discs(dvd video with an audio only track) at 24bit/48000kHz.

I make the assumption that you already transferred and have your raw wav file/files sampled/downsampled to 24/48 and you are working on a windows os. All programs used are freeware or shareware with no restrictions on usage.

Programs used
cd wave
http://www.milosoftware.com/cdwave/

flac encoder and frontend
http://flac.sourceforge.net/download.html

Lplex
http://sourceforge.net/projects/audioplex/

Step 1: Track raw wav files
Purpose to prepare wav files so you can fast foward on the final author to where you want(same as chapter points on video)
This step is optional but recommended.

1. Open cdwave and load in your raw wav file.
2. Choose your split points.
3. Once you've set your split points and renamed your output files accordingly choose save pick your output directory and choose output mode as direct wav.
4. Rinse and repeat if you have more than one raw wav file you want to track just make sure all the final tracked wav files are named so they are sequentally listed.

notes: cdwave does support input and output of 24bit wav files and flac files.

Step 2: Compress and decompress tracked wav files using flac
Purpose: To fix the header of the wav files of any nonstandard information that may cause problems during playback or authoring. This may happen from the a/d conversion or during the downsampling process depending on what you use.
The step is optional but recommended if you are not certain.

1. Open flac frontend and set the compression level to 0(for speed purposes only).

2. Compress then decompress the wav files. The compression process will strip and fix any errors in the wav header if they exist.

Step 3: Author your dvd-a

1. Drag and drop your folder with your finished wav files onto the Lplex.exe file in windows explorer/my computer.
2. Wait until it is finished and that is it.

Advantages to Lplex.
1. Lplex will do gapless chaptering so there is no skips between chapters.
2. No menus when authoring.
3. Lplex will add an xtra folder which you can add your txt file, pictures, md5 files etc that is valid in folder structure for burning dvds and won't affect playback.

[Tubular]

You can track out your files with the very easy to use program CD Wave, it's only $15 (tons of ppl use it):
http://www.milosoftware.com/cdwave/index.html

Or you can use the free program Audacity:
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

CD Wave is the tool of choice though.

[PencilGeek]

:wtf: :hmm: what did you use at that audio engineering school you went to?

LOL. Back in the days I took audio engineering, we used Ampex 24-track 3-inch reel-to-reel multi-track decks to record, and mixed down to 1/2 track 1/4-inch decks for studio masters. There were no such things as a CDs, DVDs, or even software to record or modify audio. Heck, this was right before the IBM-PC was first introduced.

I wasn't trying to make a point about the skills I learned in audio engineering to work with software, I was making the point about the skills learned to mix down, equalize, compress if necessary, minimize noise, splice things together and create a master reference recording. I was saying I believed I could do a better job than Joe Sixpack at mastering my own recordings.



I'm going to add two cents - cause this thread is killing me.
Everyone is dancing around the question you asked - as to not 'hurt your feelings' - whatever. Id rather give you an honest and direct response.

1. You're using the wrong program to work with audio, attempting to create DVD-A, etc.. IMO.
2. Should any forum change their seeding policy because you're having issues.... um, no.


By all means, let's not step on anybody's sensibilities. I've purchased and used 6 or 8 audio and video editing packages (maybe even more). I've even purchased two or three Blu-Ray editing packages, and we all know those aren't cheap. Some of these programs do things well, others aren't worth a dime. I've also used a few of these low-end, free, or nearly free packages (although not the ones specifically mentioned in this thread). In my experience, they are pure pieces of crap that are barely worth a dime. They are either completly impossible to use, or don't do eveything I want, or crash with the very first I use them. And as a software writer by trade, there's nothing that pisses me off more than a piece of software that crashes the first time I try to use it. I've become a firm believer in 'you get what you pay for.' (Even though WaveLab isn't cheap, I believe it's mostly a piece of crap also...but at least it creates a DVD-A.) So while we're not stepping on sensibilities here, let me say that if mediocrity is your standard, then you will always be satisfied with your results.


You are not the first to create a DVD-A or work with higher bitrate files.
You are the first to believe a new seeding policy is needed to deal with these files.

Pencilgeek, why do you believe a new policy is needed ?

I don't necessarily believe a new policy is needed. As a previous guy responded: it's only a discussion. I'm completely open-minded about the possibilities of changing software or doing things a little differently in order to get the same end result.

File sizes, download speeds, etc. are pure emotional arguments to me. I don't care about file sizes and download speeds. I don't care if somebody only wants to play it on their computer. It's more important to me that somebody have a true and accurate rendition of my master recording as I mastered it, than it is for me to care how long it took them to download it, or how and where they will play it. Remember, I don't master my shows to CD-Audio or DVD-Audio for the benevolence of mankind; I do it for myself and if others can benefit as a byproduct, then everybody goes away happy. I'm already doing them the favor by making the shows available; it's not incumbent on me to spend an extra minute of my time or dollar of my money to give it away in a format other than the one I created for my own personal use. Therefore, if there's some tool I can use to create 96/24 FLAC files without any substantial invenstment in my time or money, then I'm willing to do it. Otherwise...too bad...you lose...because we all know I don't lose...I own the recordings.

Now that we haven't stepped on anybody's sensibilities, I am very curious what tools are available that might do what you want, with the least amount of time and/or investment on my part. Are there tools that can read a WAV file with regions meta-data and break up into FLAC files? Or is there an audio editing package that will read a regions list and/or CUE list and auto break apart into individual files? Because as I said earlier, if I have to break down a flat WAV file by hand into 31 individual files, I'm not interested in that type of time investment. Doing so would also make my own projects (my personal use) messier and more time-intensive to create and maintain.

Likewise, if there was a DVD-V program that could simply be pointed to a 96/24 WAV file with regions and/or CUE, and would simply and conveniently create the output with a basic text-based menu (again, without any apreciable time or intervention on my part), then I'd certainly be willing to give it a try.

Finally, back to the main topic. I don't think offering ISO's will break the backs of the trading community. I believe I understand why they are disallowed (I think I read it's because of the risk of unauthorized or inappropriate material being released). I believe these are all problems that can be solved with a little effort and creative thinking. And from my point of view, it certainly solves a lot of nagging problems about distribution and the competence of Joe Sixpack and his abilities to recreate the master as I intended it to be heard.

As an aside, and at the expense of hijacking my own topic, I'd really love to know how many of these people wanting 96/24 FLAC files have nothing more to play it on than their PC's with 1" speakers attached...or even a "high-end" computer speaker set up. How many of you guys are really hooking your computers up to $10000 (or more) of audio gear to play these 96/24 files? Because if you're not, you're really fooling yourselves into thinking you'll benefit with these files.

/PG

[PencilGeek]

You can track out your files with the very easy to use program CD Wave, it's only $15 (tons of ppl use it):
http://www.milosoftware.com/cdwave/index.html

Or you can use the free program Audacity:
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

CD Wave is the tool of choice though.

I'll look at CD Wave tonight. If it does what I want, then everybody will certainly be happy.

/PG

[Tubular]

Once you track out the files with CD Wav, you can compress to FLAC for free with FLAC frontend:
http://flac.sourceforge.net/download.html
Then seed 24/96 FLACs if you want to go that route.

This is a very simple program, only $40, for creating an audio only DVD-V with a simple menu. Just drag the tracked out .wavs into it:
http://www.audio-dvd-creator.com/

I have heard a huge difference between CDs and 24 bit DVD-As when just played back on a system consisting of a $300 receiver, $200 DVD-A/V player, and $300 bookshelf speakers. I agree, unless you are sending a coax or optical to a receiver or pre/pro from your computer, you aren't going to hear a huge difference on typical computer speakers with a 16 bit soundcard. If you had great computer speakers with a good 24 bit soundcard, that's different. But then there will be all the electrostatic noise and stuff.

[PencilGeek]

1. You're using the wrong program to work with audio, attempting to create DVD-A, etc.. IMO.
2. Should any forum change their seeding policy because you're having issues.... um, no.


Sorry, if I gave you the misimpression that I was having any 'issues' at all and therefore needed a change of policy. I'm not having any issues creating or distributing any content. My work flow works perfectly, is streamlined, and I can take one pre-mastered recordings and have it ready for download in 15-20 minutes (maybe more, maybe less, depending how much time I put into the release notes telling stories of the concert, etc.).

It's the people at the OTHER END who were having the issues. I spent 6 or 8 hours debugging the problem to discover the root cause (NERO sucks). Therefore, I started this thread to get some discussion going.

So let's be clear: I'm not the one with the problem, I'm trying to solve somebody else's problem...and this thread is the discussion for a proposal for doing so.

/PG

[direwolf-pgh]

Sorry, if I gave you the misimpression that I was having any 'issues' at all and therefore needed a change of policy. I'm not having any issues creating or distributing any content. My work flow works perfectly, is streamlined, and I can take one pre-mastered recordings and have it ready for download in 15-20 minutes (maybe more, maybe less, depending how much time I put into the release notes telling stories of the concert, etc.).

It's the people at the OTHER END who were having the issues. I spent 6 or 8 hours debugging the problem to discover the root cause (NERO sucks). Therefore, I started this thread to get some discussion going.

So let's be clear: I'm not the one with the problem, I'm trying to solve somebody else's problem...and this thread is the discussion for a proposal for doing so.

/PG:popcorn: one of those 'its everybody else' problems.
man, those are tough ones. I bet it gets figured out.