SHN -> FLAC , conversion help

[kathmustdie]

I am keen on having my Phish shn's converted to FLAC. Seems like a daunting task but it is well worth it i feel , instead of having to look at the txt file for the song names etc

here are some of my problems:

i followed the guide to foobar SHN -> FLAC conversion and successfully converted my SHN to FLAC with bit veification (with no errors). Now the original SHN files came with a MD5 hash file , and when i convert the new flac files back to SHN and see if the original SHN MD5 gets verified via TLH , they fail.

My question is : Is it normal/okay for the Original SHN MD5 to fail when converting from Original SHN -> FLAC -> SHN?

i use foobar to convert to flac and verify with TLH

Help would be appreciated!

Also , when i generate a ST5 Checksum of the original SHN files , it remains constant across different formats!

[AAR.oner]

its normal for the md5's to not be the same, as they compare container info [unimportant] in addition to the audio data...changing file formats changes the container info, which'll change the md5 hash

st5's only check the audio data, no matter the file format...so as long as those checked out then you've got identical files

[kathmustdie]

its normal for the md5's to not be the same, as they compare container info [unimportant] in addition to the audio data...changing file formats changes the container info, which'll change the md5 hash

st5's only check the audio data, no matter the file format...so as long as those checked out then you've got identical files

thanks! that was really helpful

as a personal choice , would you have the original SHN's converted to flac?

as much as i want to , i have about 1.2 tb of SHN's from Phish

[AAR.oner]

theoretically, sure...flac is a far superior format

but realistically, nah there's no way i'd spend that amount of time just to convert formats

[kathmustdie]

baah , i guess it'll keep the SHN's intact then. Then there are also problems of Fixing SBE's which i am sure that many of my SHN's would have -.-

thanks a bunch AAR.oner

[Teembo]

theoretically, sure...flac is a far superior format

but realistically, nah there's no way i'd spend that amount of time just to convert formats

the conversions may take a long time, but Foobar has a batch mode where you can really do all of your files without keeping an eye on it.

[AAR.oner]

the conversions may take a long time, but Foobar has a batch mode where you can really do all of your files without keeping an eye on it.

unfortunately Foobar is Windows only, and i run Macs

but good to know, will recommend that to pc users in the future

[Audioarchivist]

Some would argue that it's better to keep old filesets as they were originally traded, to make re-seeding truly possible. Nothing worse than finding something's "re-seeded" only to find that it doesn't match your files. You can't jump in to help seed something because someone needlessly re-converted the files! I'd vote to keep them exactly as they were first traded, to keep them identical to what might be commonly circulating. It's kind of pointless to dirty up some well-traded oldschool files.....

[rspencer]

i use foobar to convert to flac and verify with TLH


Why? Just do it all in TLH.

[ccrider895]

Some would argue that it's better to keep old filesets as they were originally traded, to make re-seeding truly possible. Nothing worse than finding something's "re-seeded" only to find that it doesn't match your files. You can't jump in to help seed something because someone needlessly re-converted the files! I'd vote to keep them exactly as they were first traded, to keep them identical to what might be commonly circulating. It's kind of pointless to dirty up some well-traded oldschool files.....

Read Aaron's post about the st5 files and how you can use them to check the converted flac files files against the old shn files. IMO, the less chance of having SBE's and other errors far outweighs the "convenience" of being able to help seed something. With today's internet speeds that shouldn't even be an issue.

Converting to flac isn't "dirtying them up". It's a much better format. There's a still ton of those old school shns with SBE's floating around. But there's also plenty of old shns being phased out and converted to flac. If you're trying to discourage this trend, hate to tell ya, but that boat sailed a long time ago. ;)

[lintoni]

Some would argue that it's better to keep old filesets as they were originally traded, to make re-seeding truly possible. Nothing worse than finding something's "re-seeded" only to find that it doesn't match your files. You can't jump in to help seed something because someone needlessly re-converted the files! I'd vote to keep them exactly as they were first traded, to keep them identical to what might be commonly circulating. It's kind of pointless to dirty up some well-traded oldschool files.....

Read Aaron's post about the st5 files and how you can use them to check the converted flac files files against the old shn files. IMO, the less chance of having SBE's and other errors far outweighs the "convenience" of being able to help seed something. With today's internet speeds that shouldn't even be an issue.

Converting to flac isn't "dirtying them up". It's a much better format. There's a still ton of those old school shns with SBE's floating around. But there's also plenty of old shns being phased out and converted to flac. If you're trying to discourage this trend, hate to tell ya, but that boat sailed a long time ago. ;)

:thumbsup

And re bolded - honestly, there are much, much worse things.