I retracked a show!

[Lou]

OK here's what it says, verbatim with regard to the S/N noise ratio for Deck B (the recording deck) on my $300 Sony RCD-W500C standalone burner:

"Signal to Noise Ratio Over 98 dB during play"

True, on a standalone burner you then have to re-rip on the computer to get the tracks exactly perfect and to do splicing. Yes this requires some more work than to transfer directly to the computer. But it's worth it in my opinion not to have to investigate, buy and install sound cards and get into compatibility issues and all that shit. I just find that whole process of doing things via computer a complete pain in the ass. Plus when I'm recording with the standalone I'm not tying up the computer, and I can use the computer for other things.

In terms of CDR generations my attitude is who cares as long as there's no digital errors introduced. Of course no one would prefer that extra ones be added but my opinion is, if it's all within my exclusive control, does it REALLY matter? CDR generations have ZERO impact, ZERO on the audio quality. The impact is solely on introduction of digital errors down the line. This is a potential hazard when you have a chain of people trading with each other at arms' length. I don't see the problem when it's just me alone doing it. It may not be "preferable," but nothing in life is perfect is it? There's a difference between degrading the audio and introducing digital errors which have nothing to do with the actual quality of the audio.

[wazoo2u]

Lou,

I'm always in favor of the method that will yield the highest quality and least amount of audio error. I realize it's a tradeoff sometimes. In general, most of us are interested in offering advice on how to achieve the best results, and what methods are most prone to inducing errors. Is adding a DAE gen better than doing an A/D with a bad sound chip ? IMO, both aren't ideal. For a fairly small investment, you could get a DAT deck to do the E/E A/D conversion and then go optical into your computer. I understand that there are some really cheap soundcards that offer a non-resampled digital input, and that would eliminate much of the noise issues inherent in your PC.

There's lots of pitfalls in archiving audio and video. Ultimately, it's up to you as to how much effort and money you want to expend on this hobby, and how interested/dedicated you are to preserving the quality of the music that you have on tape. It's been said repeatedly here that the most important QC step you can take is to listen to your seed and make sure it's error free.

I'm not a MOD here at TTD, and can't say if your transfer methods would be considered problematic or "against the rules". You would need to ask that question of them directly.

[Lou]

Yeah I haven't actually seeded anything here for fear that it won't be acceptable. If I burn something to a standalone, rip for the sole purpose of splicing and tracking, do what I need to do, listen to it to make sure there aren't any errors (and frankly, I really don't see why there would be given it's all within my control) then I don't see what the problem is. CDR generations do not degrade audio. They don't remove frequencies, clip the highs or add noise.

I guess my problem is that if standalone transfers are frowned upon simply because of an extra CDR generation, then that really sucks.

[wazoo2u]

Originally Posted by Lou

In terms of CDR generations my attitude is who cares as long as there's no digital errors introduced. Of course no one would prefer that extra ones be added but my opinion is, if it's all within my exclusive control, does it REALLY matter? CDR generations have ZERO impact, ZERO on the audio quality. The impact is solely on introduction of digital errors down the line. This is a potential hazard when you have a chain of people trading with each other at arms' length. I don't see the problem when it's just me alone doing it. It may not be "preferable," but nothing in life is perfect is it? There's a difference between degrading the audio and introducing digital errors which have nothing to do with the actual quality of the audio.

Lou,

The problem with DAE is that digital errors can only be corrected a finite amount of times before they can no longer be compensated for. It's like skating on clear ice that keeps wearing down. You can still skate on it, still see through it until it gets so thin that blammo.... you're in the lake. Your perception that digital errors have no impact on the "quality" of the audio isn't quite correct. They don't degrade the audio, they cause it to either exist, or not exist. I'll assume that you're in favor of the former, right ?

[Lou]

First off what does "DAE" mean, digital-analog extraction or something?

Well I won't post here since this is evidently a problem. It's clear there's only one acceptable method of transfer here, which is to spend thousands of dollars on a top-end PC with a top-end sound card. Any non-PC transfer is thus polluting the community.

[pmonk]

TTD is not totally anti-generational. The concern is the more generations the higher risk of error.

If you read the policy its states:

2. All seeds must be digitally pure (no diginoise) gapless audio files.
Digital skipping or clicking noises are the result of incorrectly ripped or burned CDs, and are explicitly prohibited at this site. Please listen closely to your files before seeding to ensure they are digitally clean. Also, your files must play back gaplessly without any skips or hiccups between tracks. For live shows this is important and clips in the audience noise or song transitions are extremely irritating. 2-second gaps are often the result of incorrectly burned audio CDRs (using track-at-once mode), and are not allowed for seeding here. Also, shows that are not aligned properly to sector boundaries may have short (~1/75 of a second) clips of silence that interrupt the flow between tracks. Ensure that your files are perfectly seamless before seeding.

[pmonk]

The majority of errors occur during improper rips and burns. Repeat the process over and over again and the chance of errors increase.

You make a complete error-free transfer (no clicks, no sbe's, etc...) I see no reason why it can't be torrented on TTD.

TTD just wants to avoid the problems eztree experience where 20% of the stuff you download have errors!

[Five]

thanks pmonk, that's right

Originally Posted by Lou

In terms of CDR generations my attitude is who cares as long as there's no digital errors introduced. Of course no one would prefer that extra ones be added but my opinion is, if it's all within my exclusive control, does it REALLY matter? CDR generations have ZERO impact, ZERO on the audio quality. The impact is solely on introduction of digital errors down the line. This is a potential hazard when you have a chain of people trading with each other at arms' length. I don't see the problem when it's just me alone doing it. It may not be "preferable," but nothing in life is perfect is it? There's a difference between degrading the audio and introducing digital errors which have nothing to do with the actual quality of the audio.

nothing wrong with this. you burn the cdr on your standalone, then extract it 100.00% accurate to your computer. If the cdr isn't perfect then you just make another one and rip from that.

Lou - i apologize if i offended you. i did not mean to. i was just trying to state two simple things: (1) to me, it seems easier/quicker to go analog to PC (because thankfully, i haven't encountered any compatibility issues with my hardware), and (2) some consumer CD recorders have bad S/N ratios, which adds noise into the recording. of course, the 2nd item appears to not apply to your situation, as it looks like you have a good standalone unit.

personally, i have no problem with standalone transferred audio material. i have dozens and dozens of shows with that in the lineage (because it was either trade with the DAT taper who only used a standalone for transfers, or go without the recording period). none of said recordings that i received had any audible errors. and i promptly archived SHN versions after listening to them.

so, if it were my site, i'd say it's fine to seed analog > standalone > cdr > eac in secure mode > shn/flac recordings. but this isn't my site, so i cannot and will not speak for the moderators. just letting you know that i can't make that call here, but to me, i have no problem with standalone conversions. (IMO, the quality of audio shows converted with standalone recorders are MUCH better than video recordings converted with standalone DVD recorders!!)

oh, and "DAE" means Digital Audio Extraction (it's the process of ripping an audio CD to WAV format on your hard drive).

cheers.

Originally Posted by Lou

... There's a difference between degrading the audio and introducing digital errors which have nothing to do with the actual quality of the audio.

I don't have an opinion one way or the other on the standalone vs PC issue, but the above quote is simply false. The audio and the digital data are one and the same thing.

[Lou]

Originally Posted by uhclem

I don't have an opinion one way or the other on the standalone vs PC issue, but the above quote is simply false. The audio and the digital data are one and the same thing.

What I meant to say is that unlike tape generations, going from CDR generation to CDR generation doesn't reduce the highs or make the speed incorrect or introduce hiss. So if you burn something from one CDR to the next, the quality theoretically should be perfect. I contend that if you are in control of the whole process, and you listen to the CDR and it's fine, then it shouldn't matter that one CDR was in the lineage. Whereas it matters one hell of a lot if an extra tape was in the lineage years ago.

An extra CDR doesn't mean degradation in how the music sounds. It just means there's a chance that errors creep in. I contend one extra CDR in the lineage, when it's all under your control and you've listened to it to make sure, doesn't make any difference in sound quality.

[wazoo2u]

Originally Posted by Lou

An extra CDR doesn't mean degradation in how the music sounds. It just means there's a chance that errors creep in. I contend one extra CDR in the lineage, when it's all under your control and you've listened to it to make sure, doesn't make any difference in sound quality.

This statement is simply untrue.

You really need to study a bit about CD technology and the hard numbers that make up the magic of digital audio. Errors occur that you cannot hear or see in the process. Jitter and Bit Error Rates both have an effect on the sound purity. Why do you think that there is such an emphasis placed on using EAC for DAE ?? These issues have already been studied and discussed at length in the technical community. I know it doesn't sound logical to you, but you need to account for the science of the technology before you let logic be your guide.

Read this: http://www.cdrfaq.org/ before you go any further in your deductions.

[Lou]

Well that's something I can't keep up with and don't have the time to read. Of course no one wants extra CDR generations. But I think it's ridiculously picky if someone has a serious problem with a standalone conversion versus a computer conversion, solely on the basis that there's one CDR involved as opposed to none.

The bottom line is, if you're looking for shows that were recorded on tape (which is all I look for as I'm only interested in classic rock and roll), are you going to complain if someone releases their master tape copy via a standalone transfer? I'd bitch if there were digital errors in the CD to be sure, but if you listen to the CD and hear nothing wrong, I think anyone who would complain is someone who's simply insatiable.

[Five]

a lot of ppl can't even tell the diff between lossless and lossy.

I've seen a couple threads recently were somebody has pointed out a "pop" sound in a show followed by a page of posts saying "I can't hear it" followed by "Okay, I listened to that portion 20 times and now I can hear it."

One of these situations happened on another site, where I was suggesting to the seeder they should use EAC since it gives error reports which can point out errors that not all of us can hear. My take on it is that when we've got the technology to make more perfect copies, let's use it!

So the cdr generation is of little consequence especially when it has been checked over carefully by the person who made the transfer, then ripped with EAC. That having been said, the TTD philosophy is to strive towards the highest level of perfection whenever possible, and it is for this reason that wazoo2u keeps belaboring these finer details.

A transfer made to a standalone and ripped with EAC is perfectly fine with the current TTD standards.

[RainDawg]

I agree with Five and wazoo. "Listening to it" is a completely unreliable method of checking the perfection of the digital copy. Using EAC (or equivalent error-correcting DAE method) is absolutely required because it is oftentimes not within the abilitity of the lister to scan an entire CD and listen for slight digital flaws. People miss them, and polluted digital copies are passed on. There is no reason to add CDR to any lineage, but if you must, EAC with proper offset correction is the only way you can be sure your copy was done correctly.

Five is right as well, that a transfer made to a standalone and EAC extracted is OK with TTD, so long as this information is made clear in the original post.

Standalone > CDR(0) > EAC > WAV is fine.