PDA

View Full Version : How to split FLAC files ???


alwaysu2
2007-09-26, 07:44 AM
HI everyone
Was wondering if there is a [easy] way to split a FLAC file ?
What app is the best for doing this,you think ?
Thanx in advance
Chris,Amsterdam

Homebrew101
2007-09-26, 08:21 AM
I think you might have to convert to WAV and then CD Wave cut be used to split the file.

Perhaps some one else has a better idea.

U2Lynne
2007-09-26, 10:22 AM
Make sure when you split them you do so on sector boundaries or you will get little microgaps between the tracks. I assume you are on a PC? Hopefully someone can help you out if you need more information.

greenheatherc
2007-09-26, 10:37 AM
I think audacity is the best freeware program to split tracks. I'm pretty sure that you have to convert the flac to wav first.

http://download-audacity.org/?gclid=CP2hrZas4Y4CFQwsOAodnmTxPg

greenheatherc
2007-09-26, 10:42 AM
Once you've converted the flac to wav:

Simplest method using Audacity and xACT:

1. Open your wave, Edit->Move Cursor...->Track Start and hit command-B.
2. Locate all your track splits and mark each one by hitting command-B.
3. Go to File->Export Multiple, select WAV as the export format, Split files based on:Labels, Name files:Numbering consecutively, hit Export.

You'll now have a nice set of consecutively numbered split tracks but they are not cut on sector boundaries. Fear not.

4. Open xACT and go to its fix SBE tab.
5. Add your freshly split WAV's, making extra sure that they appear in the correct order. Ignore the MD5 options, select your output format of choice and hit the Fix button.
6. Admire your handiwork.

Five
2007-09-26, 10:43 AM
set audacity to 'snap to cdda sectors' :thumbsup

make sure export quality in the preferences are set correctly (most probably 16bit 44.1kHz).

there's some way to export the tracks all at once but I haven't tested/tried that yet. once you have snapping to cdda set correctly and export quality matching the original bit depth and sample rate you can (somewhat awkwardly) cut the first track from the large file, paste to a new file, save, repeat, repeat, repeat ... until you've cut the show into tracks. you can perform a len check at the end using TLH to check that you're SBE-free (which you should be if you set the snapping to cdda sectors).

edit: there you go (see heather's post above) :D

alwaysu2
2007-09-27, 02:34 AM
thanksto you all
I'll give it a try,but its not going to be easy
But I knew that

Thanks for your quick reply
hope I not have to come back to you :) :) :)

Chris from the beautiful Amsterdam

69mako
2007-09-27, 02:38 AM
Actually CDWave can open FLAC files, track them and export to several formats including .WAV and FLAC.

Mako

alwaysu2
2007-09-27, 03:50 AM
can someone tell me where to find Xact , cant find it anywhere !!!
:drunk: :drunk: :sleepy: :sleepy:

U2Lynne
2007-09-27, 10:51 AM
can someone tell me where to find Xact , cant find it anywhere !!!
:drunk: :drunk: :sleepy: :sleepy:
It's the second link that comes up when you Google "xACT"

http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/21952

weedwacker
2007-09-27, 11:57 AM
You can split flac files without converting and output them as flac or wav files(always sbe free) with newer versions of cdwave editor.

xcv111
2007-11-04, 01:20 PM
'snap to cdda sectors'

I've been using Cool Pro 2.0 and haven't found - lazy me(?) - such a function. Therefore in using FLAC Frontend. Totally unnecessary procedure?

Is there such a funtion as 'snap to CDDA sectors' in Cool pro 2.0?

Five
2007-11-04, 05:42 PM
with cep you have too load in the entire show, then select each part that you want to be a track (highlight it beginning to end, eg 0:00-3:57) then hit 'F8' and continue doing that until all the tracks are marked. trouble is, there's a small bug in cep so you have to right-click the time display and select 'samples' then right-click one of the cue marks, select 'go to cue list', highlight all the marked tracks and change the type of cue to 'track' and it will snap to cdda sectors. but if you look carefully at the numbers, some of them will be a little screwed up, a couple sectors missing. where you see this happening, copy the end of the previous track's 'end' sample # and copy it to the beginning of the next track and it will be corrected. then re-name the cues to what you want the track names to be, hit 'batch' and you can save with those names, even as FLAC if you have the FLAC filter installed. this method is not idiot-proof at all, so if you're not confident then find another prog to do it that works better. its easy to screw up and miss little bits of the show when cutting with cep if you don't know exactly what you're doing.

^sorry that's kind of confusing, post any questions here and I'll clarify! :wave:

xcv111
2007-11-06, 05:24 PM
OK.
Thanks for your reply Five. Somehow your answer concerning alignment on sector boundaries using Cool Pro 2.0 made me more convinced to use FLAC Frontend for that. The Cool Pro procedure seemed a little too complicated.

It's just so much more easier in FLAC Frontend: you just check "align on sector boundaries" option and that's that.

Five
2007-11-06, 05:58 PM
the cd authoring bug is the worst bug I know of and the way it adds cue stops is just awkward. Its still there even in Audition 1.5, and Audition 2.0 introduces other bugs but hopefully they will pull it together one of these years. Overall 99.5% perfect program as of Audacity 1.5 and 99.4% perfect as of CEP 2.1. All versions previous to 2.1 were prone to crashes on my computer, esp with long files.

What I like best about Audition/CEP is the fast fast editing and (arguably) unsurpassed design. It really is the Photoshop of audio.

but yeah, do it with FLAC Frontend :lol And uncheck the 'add tags' button for sure, that's the only and worst bug I know of in FFE :lol: :lol:

Also the latest release (I think its 1.4) is significantly faster than the previous versions, something like 50% :eek: so its worth taking the upgrade if you haven't already. but still those fucked-up tags :disbelief :lol:

I'm going to try to start cutting in Audacity, seems they've got it right except moving around a 120min show in the editor is a snail's pace compared to cep mousewheel zoom. Audacity is unfortunately not optimised for speed to the same extent that CEP/Audition are.

In fact I would go so far as to say it is the fastest editor available on any platform today. I've tried tons of them and they are all slow, slow, slow in the nav department.

xcv111
2007-11-07, 01:41 AM
but yeah, do it with FLAC Frontend :lol And uncheck the 'add tags' button for sure, that's the only and worst bug I know of in FFE :lol: :lol:
Right.
All I have checked are "verify" and "align on sector boundaries" in FLAC Frontend. And the of course "fingerprints" when generating Flac fingerprints afterwards. I guess that's all needed to be checked to make proper Flac files. Right?

You are right about the FLAC Frontend's decoding speed. It's slow, but I don't mind about it too much. My FLAC Frontend version is ancient(?) 1.07.0001. Possibly I should upgrade for a newer version?

I don't know if I am stubborn, mingy or just simply stupid not willing to go for Audacity, since I already have Cool Pro 2.0. I do know that some Audacity's editing possibilities are superior(?) compared to Cool Pro like a possibility to "paint" some sonic changes right into the audio spectral view - a feature I actually dreamed of before it was finally realised in Audacity. Me myself I'm into Photoshop by my profession, that's why my "painting" idea.

xcv111
2007-11-07, 07:28 AM
FLAC Frontend's decoding speed
Uh, huh...
Typo again! :mad: I ment encoding speed!

Five
2007-11-07, 08:36 AM
All I have checked are "verify" and "align on sector boundaries" in FLAC Frontend. And the of course "fingerprints" when generating Flac fingerprints afterwards. I guess that's all needed to be checked to make proper Flac files. Right?
right!

I updated FLAC at work and on my other computer that just died... seems like you haven't updated FFE in over a year so pretty safe to say you will get the added speed when you upgrade.

CEP2.0 used to crash on my computer (whereas 2.1 and Audition don't) but others have had no probs with it. As for the functionality&quality its pretty much 99% identical to 2.1 and Audition 1.0. Even 1.5 the only thing I've noticed they've added is the marquee tool which is very useful. They probably put some other stuff in there too but nothing glaringly obvious that I come across in my normal useage. Its also about the same as CEP2.1.

I find the marquee tool useful (and to me essential) for spot-fixing tiny clicks & crackles by using it together with nr>click/crackle repair>fix single click now function. With the marquee tool I can process a smaller number of samples in certain difficult situations where disturbing the lows causes an undesirable effect. I haven't found it useful to run other effects on marquee-marked blocks yet. So maybe it is on its way to being like painting with sound but for me its more like scissors, tape, photocopier & liquid paper for sound :lol: The painting so to speak still goes on mainly at the microphones and DX/VST sections and some of the stock effects.

Oh yeah, in Audition they added native VST support, however doesn't work with 100% of all plugins (as it always is with any one wrapper/wav editor).

ps I don't put eq and all that jazz on hobby-related tapes, I just try to keep them as accurate as I can to the original master recording.

Tubular
2007-11-07, 08:42 AM
The newer versions of FLAC have much improved encoding speed.
http://flac.sourceforge.net/download.html

CD Wave is the best, easiest program for tracking shows IMO. It splits the .wav files on sector boundaries, so no need to fix SBEs.
http://www.milosoftware.com/cdwave/download.html

xcv111
2007-11-07, 12:13 PM
ps I don't put eq and all that jazz on hobby-related tapes, I just try to keep them as accurate as I can to the original master recording.
Sorry. I don't get what you mean. Do you mean that it's better to leave an original - let's say - FM recording as it is?

If I got you right, I have an opposite experience. I once recorded a live show and in this case by a live show I mean it was happening exactly the same time as it was broadcasted - so them nice technicians didn't compress the sound, not much anyway. The same show was then broadcasted later and the difference was huge. The second broadcast was compressed so much it was almost "flat" compared to the original live broadcast. Because I knew the band, their sound and had the original broadcast as reference point I could EQ few missing songs from the second broadcast - IMO - sounding pretty much the same as on the original live broadcast. Ahyhow, I couldn't tell the difference after EQ'ing.

And thanks for your views on Audacity etc. Much appreciated.

Right now I'm fighting with EAC configuration to get it absolutely right according the link you've attached in your posts. It's pretty profound dive into the debts of EAC! Thanks for that link!

Sorry, my bubble is getting a bit too far away how to split Flac files. :D

xcv111
2007-11-07, 12:21 PM
The newer versions of FLAC have much improved encoding speed.
http://flac.sourceforge.net/download.html

CD Wave is the best, easiest program for tracking shows IMO. It splits the .wav files on sector boundaries, so no need to fix SBEs.
http://www.milosoftware.com/cdwave/download.html
Thanks for the info.

Five
2007-11-07, 04:07 PM
eq'ing to join two shows is a good idea, but when it comes to eq'ing a single complete show for your own taste its usually preferred to leave it alone and keep it pure, especially on boards like this. a lot of guys don't have very good speakers and will create the perfect mix ... that only sounds perfect in their own living room! :( Or do some stuff that sounds great at the time, then look back a couple years later and cringe at their own work (has happend to me!). When its raw and unaltered it is what it is, and if they invent some miracle eq in 2020 the original files still exist to be sweetened. :cool:

xcv111
2007-11-07, 04:49 PM
You're quite right Five.
Your points above made a lot of sense. I'll keep them in my mind. But if feel some shows could be better sounding and - as I told in my previous post - I'll still try to fix them sounding better. I don't try to fix every single show I hear. And yes you are right. I don't live in a perfect studio environment. I mostly live in my living room and listen to music there as well. And so on... I run out of English language. :D

But one point as well is that so called real audio pros making us them fantastic audio experiences don't live in my living room. So for what kinda room they are making them commercial releases? My guess is: for recording studios. I mean, I've been there, heard that and finally when I got the final result in my stereo system it has been just an awful listening experience. Or for some cheap transistor radio on the beach? Some or most of them sound great also in my living room, but the rest...

But anyway you're quite right.

Five
2007-11-08, 12:57 PM
its a compromise... pro mixes have to sound good summed to mono and coming out of a mono transistor radio with a one inch 5 cent speaker, also has to sound good on a boombox, car stereo, cheap headphones, expensive headphones, home stereo, expensive home stereo and also super-top-of-the-line hifi equipment (etc etc). it should be listenable on a clock radio, I'll never forget realizing one day when my cheap clock radio woke me up with led zeppelin how I could hear every note and drum hit on that puny nasty little speaker! but also sounds even better on better equiment. the mixes on tool records are another great example, sounds so clean clear and nice on a boombox but give it some big speakers that can push some bass and everything that sounded great is still there plus this whole other dimension of low frequencies making it even better :D

xcv111
2007-11-08, 01:46 PM
its a compromise...
Yup. You are right.

In this link there are few well thought points about recordings: http://www.regonaudio.com/Gradients.html

Five
2007-11-08, 04:49 PM
absolutely fascinating link, thanks for that

also worth mentioning is how drum kits and mic'ed and mixed for rock recordings: overheads dangling from above and mixed to about 30% of their real-world relative volume, tight mics on all the drums, bass drum absolutely devoid of reverb with +20dB bass boost, then the snare sounding like its in a concert hall ... its like a cartoon, isn't it? :lol:

xcv111
2007-11-08, 04:59 PM
... its like a cartoon, isn't it? :lol:
Bhua, huh, huh, huuu... Heh, heh, heee... I'll rest my case your honer! :D

AAR.oner
2007-11-08, 06:56 PM
pro mixes have to sound good summed to mono and coming out of a mono transistor radio with a one inch 5 cent speaker, also has to sound good on a boombox, car stereo, cheap headphones, expensive headphones, home stereo, expensive home stereo and also super-top-of-the-line hifi equipment (etc etc). it should be listenable on a clock radio, I'll never forget realizing one day when my cheap clock radio woke me up with led zeppelin how I could hear every note and drum hit on that puny nasty little speaker! but also sounds even better on better equiment. the mixes on tool records are another great example, sounds so clean clear and nice on a boombox but give it some big speakers that can push some bass and everything that sounded great is still there plus this whole other dimension of low frequencies making it even better :D
:clap:

Five speaks of truths rarely realized on this thing we call the internet...well said bro, if only more people listened ;)

xcv111
2007-11-10, 07:12 AM
Five speaks of truths rarely realized on this thing we call the internet...well said bro, if only more people listened ;)
Right. :)