The Traders' Den  

  The Traders' Den > Where we go to learn ..... > Technobabble
 

Notices

Technobabble Post your general Need for Help questions here.
Lossy or Lossless?
Moderators

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 2005-07-11, 06:53 PM
4candles 4candles is offline
6.36 GB/18.25 GB/2.87
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

Quote:
Originally Posted by uhclem
I've never heard this before. I'm skeptical. Even if it were true I seriously doubt that FLAC is randomly putting in a few non-zero samples to deal with it. There is no mention of this in the FLAC documentation. I think 4candles indentification of a bug in the source code sounds like the best explanation. Good catch, 4candle & pig. We need to put something about this in the FAQ and in the etree wiki.
I think this bug (assuming I'm right) has been in flac for a long time, so there's probably no urgent rush to document it without confirming the bug with the flac developers.

I've emailed the FLAC developers mailing list about it and I'll report back here when I get a reply.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #17  
Old 2005-07-12, 12:46 AM
fatoldpig fatoldpig is offline
174.19 GB/207.24 GB/1.19
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chicago area
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

thanks for looking into this. hopefully it's a bug with flac front-end and they'll fix it soon.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #18  
Old 2005-07-12, 01:30 AM
Five's Avatar
Five Five is offline
TTD Staff
186.65 GB/588.32 GB/3.15
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Canada
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

Quote:
Originally Posted by uhclem
I've never heard this before. I'm skeptical. Even if it were true I seriously doubt that FLAC is randomly putting in a few non-zero samples to deal with it. There is no mention of this in the FLAC documentation. I think 4candles indentification of a bug in the source code sounds like the best explanation. Good catch, 4candle & pig. We need to put something about this in the FAQ and in the etree wiki.
after searching for a bit I can't find any reference to this anywhere online & I can't remember where I heard it. So it looks to me like this is a minor bug with FLAC frontend like everybody's been saying... sorry guys for putting forward this questionable information without doing my research first!
__________________
Checksums Demystified EAC Config MakeTorrent WinAmp Config

Modern social theory casts a highly skeptical eye on any declaration that a group of persons is without conflict, and insists, on the contrary, that conflict is natural to groups, and even more, is essential to them. -Patrick Henry
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #19  
Old 2005-07-12, 03:28 AM
4candles 4candles is offline
6.36 GB/18.25 GB/2.87
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatoldpig
thanks for looking into this. hopefully it's a bug with flac front-end and they'll fix it soon.
It's nothing to do with flac front-end, it's a bug in the "flac" program itself (i.e. flac.exe for Windows users).

I've had no reply yet, but my bug report can be found here:

http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac...July/date.html
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #20  
Old 2005-07-13, 02:20 AM
skyofcrack's Avatar
skyofcrack skyofcrack is offline
97.58 GB/389.78 GB/3.99
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

In the meantime, just to be safe, should we untick the box in FLAC Frontend for 'align on sector boundaries,' if I'm understanding this conversation correctly?

soc
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #21  
Old 2005-07-13, 02:50 AM
feralicious's Avatar
feralicious feralicious is offline
dare to discover
63.44 GB/133.90 GB/2.11
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: occasionally
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

How come noone has mentioned that simply going from flac > wav > flac (align on sector boundaries) isn't the proper way to fix SBEs? I distincly remember being schooled on that in a thread a while back. Doesn't that cause it to not shift the data from track to track but rather pad each track individually thereby adding silence between tracks? It should go flac > wav > fix SBEs > flac, no?

Or am I completely mad?
__________________
feralicious goodies
Don't get even.
Get odd.

....
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #22  
Old 2005-07-13, 03:50 AM
4candles 4candles is offline
6.36 GB/18.25 GB/2.87
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

Quote:
Originally Posted by feralicious
How come noone has mentioned that simply going from flac > wav > flac (align on sector boundaries) isn't the proper way to fix SBEs? I distincly remember being schooled on that in a thread a while back. Doesn't that cause it to not shift the data from track to track but rather pad each track individually thereby adding silence between tracks? It should go flac > wav > fix SBEs > flac, no?

Or am I completely mad?
Taking the simple example of three files, there are two ways to convert them to flac. Firstly, by running flac.exe three times:

flac -8 file1.wav
flac -8 file2.wav
flac -8 file3.wav

or the alternative is to just run flac.exe once:

flac -8 file1.wav file2.wav file3.wav

The "--sector-align" option only makes sense when you are using the second method. Using the first method (running flac separately for each file) will do as you describe, and simply pad each track with silence. The second method will move partial sectors from the end of one track to the start of the following track - exactly the same as shntool does (by default).

I believe that early versions of FLAC Front-end used the earlier method, and hence the sector-align facility in FLAC Front-end was useless, but I believe that recent versions of FLAC Front-end do the right thing.

And to answer the previous question, yes, I wouldn't use the sector-align option in FLAC any more - at least until a bug-fixed release is made.

I still haven't heard anything back from my bug report, but it's only been a little more than 24 hours.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #23  
Old 2005-07-13, 08:12 AM
skyofcrack's Avatar
skyofcrack skyofcrack is offline
97.58 GB/389.78 GB/3.99
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

I've always used shntool to fix my sbe's and I'll definitely turn off that function until I hear back about the bug.

Thanks for the heads up.

soc
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #24  
Old 2005-07-13, 12:18 PM
Beleaguered's Avatar
Beleaguered Beleaguered is offline
60.20 GB/167.62 GB/2.78
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 4candles
It's nothing to do with flac front-end, it's a bug in the "flac" program itself (i.e. flac.exe for Windows users).

I've had no reply yet, but my bug report can be found here:

http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/flac...July/date.html
You might also want to document your bug on the bug tracker:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?grou...78&atid=113478
__________________
"If it weren’t for the Buzzcocks, who knows, we might sound like Good Charlotte…oh they’re good, it just sounds like…well, it tastes like a popsicle that’s been stuck up somebody’s ass, but that’s my opinion. Some people are into that, who am I to say? " -Eddie Vedder, Madison Square Garden, August 2003
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #25  
Old 2005-07-13, 01:23 PM
4candles 4candles is offline
6.36 GB/18.25 GB/2.87
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beleaguered
You might also want to document your bug on the bug tracker:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?grou...78&atid=113478
You're right - that's the correct way to report a FLAC bug. I've added it here:

http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index...78&atid=113478

Thanks.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #26  
Old 2005-07-13, 02:03 PM
fatoldpig fatoldpig is offline
174.19 GB/207.24 GB/1.19
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Chicago area
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

for now i'll use, shntool fix -o flac *.flac to fix sbe.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #27  
Old 2005-07-14, 12:20 PM
ssamadhi97's Avatar
ssamadhi97 ssamadhi97 is offline
meow.
87.81 GB/69.41 GB/0.79
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Old Europe
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

cute, flac accidentally pads with samples from "earlier"



padded data (196 samples) is identical with the highlighted selection
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #28  
Old 2005-07-14, 01:07 PM
Ted Ted is offline
You are TOO
2.08 GB/7.38 GB/3.55
 
Join Date: May 2005
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

I pretty sure that's what 4candles found out when he earlier posted about it not clearing the buffer before padding. I think he discovered that it cleared only the first half of the buffer.
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #29  
Old 2005-07-14, 01:20 PM
Five's Avatar
Five Five is offline
TTD Staff
186.65 GB/588.32 GB/3.15
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Canada
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

and it looks like the bug was missed because the 2nd half of the buffer will often be zero samples anyways.
__________________
Checksums Demystified EAC Config MakeTorrent WinAmp Config

Modern social theory casts a highly skeptical eye on any declaration that a group of persons is without conflict, and insists, on the contrary, that conflict is natural to groups, and even more, is essential to them. -Patrick Henry

Last edited by Five; 2005-07-14 at 03:08 PM. Reason: put 1st when it should read 2nd...
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
  #30  
Old 2005-07-14, 01:58 PM
4candles 4candles is offline
6.36 GB/18.25 GB/2.87
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Re: SBE fix gives different result with shntool & flac front-end?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssamadhi97
cute, flac accidentally pads with samples from "earlier"



padded data (196 samples) is identical with the highlighted selection
Nice picture - it summarises the bug nicely, which as you say is that flac only half-clears the buffer, leaving data from earlier in the input file in the second half.

I'm surprised by the lack of response to my bug report - maybe Josh is on vacation...
Reply With Quote Reply with Nested Quotes
Reply

The Traders' Den > Where we go to learn ..... > Technobabble

Similar Threads
Thread Forum Replies Last Post
Flac Front End - Cantrip Technobabble 9 2008-04-04 08:12 PM
Problem with source material result code = -18771 - billysera Technobabble 1 2006-06-26 10:21 PM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forums


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:31 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - , TheTradersDen.org - All Rights Reserved - Hosted at QuickPacket
no new posts