[U2Lynne]

Hey Joey, you did a lot of stuff just fine on that torrent/seed. It looks like you figured out how to connect to your own torrent, which seems to be one of the more confusing things for newbies.

One thing I did notice which I brought up in the thread is that you should generate and post shntool md5s with your shows instead of just regular, standard md5s. The difference is that shntool md5s make a fingerprint of the audio part of the file and disregard the rest. Since it is just the audio being fingerprinted, then the 32-digit number that is the fingerprint will stay the same no matter what format the file is in - shn, wav, flac, aif, etc. So, no matter what sort of conversion someone does on the file, as long as it is a lossless conversion, that fingerprint will remain the same. Flac fingerprints do the same thing - thus a flac fingerprint of a flac file and an shntool md5 of a flac file are the same. This is from the pop-up on the upload page:

All of the examples below are taken from the same three files: sample2007-04-15t01.flac, sample2007-04-15t02.flac, and sample2007-04-15t02.flac

Flac Fingerprints:
sample2007-04-15t01.flac:cb8a42007fe797435826a76cb527be01
sample2007-04-15t02.flac:25eb2520a33ed2b88edf41f5d6f09505
sample2007-04-15t03.flac:fbfced772c4d478f57072ffe9aeb2a69
Notice the file name is at the front of each line.

Shntool MD5 Checksums:
cb8a42007fe797435826a76cb527be01 [shntool] sample2007-04-15t01.flac
25eb2520a33ed2b88edf41f5d6f09505 [shntool] sample2007-04-15t02.flac
fbfced772c4d478f57072ffe9aeb2a69 [shntool] sample2007-04-15t03.flac
Notice the 32-digit number is the same as the fingerprint 32-digit number in the flac fingerprints above.

MD5 Checksums:
9c3bdb0b13e9822ff65599d6b331f775 *sample2007-04-15t01.flac
10fdca5fd9ddf55a1d21dc70d658d89c *sample2007-04-15t02.flac
544c32693e4766f08f82a3781b96da20 *sample2007-04-15t03.flac
Notice the asterisk, *, in each line and how the 32-digit number is not the same as the fingerprint or shntool md5 above.

You have source information and lineage. The only thing I would change on there is that your wrote "cdr" whereas the more correct thing would be "cdr(x)", if you don't know the generation of the cdr or "cdr(1)" (insert appropriate number) if you do know the generation.

You listed known flaws which I think is great information and saves people from saying "does anyone else hear xxxx in the middle of track y?"