IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

101 Pages V  « < 80 81 82 83 84 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current), AccurateRip support & more
korth
post Oct 27 2012, 17:58
Post #2026





Group: Members
Posts: 416
Joined: 13-March 11
Member No.: 88969



QUOTE (Porcus @ Oct 27 2012, 14:52) *
An unrelated question ...
Since CTDB started per-track verification, all rip results from CUERipper and the EAC plugin are submitted but repair data is only supposed to be accepted for good rips. Per-disc verification can have several (1/x) No match results from rips with some errors by design. Those results are stored to increase confidence levels for the tracks without errors. The detailed log is Off by default so most users should only see the per-track results similar to AR.
CUETools only submits to CTDB if AR confidence is greater than 1 AND no existing entry is found in CTDB.

[EDIT]
You're probably seeing a bad repair submission from the EAC plugin. See CTDB EAC Plugin: Known_issues. Don't trust (1/x) results for repair.
But it could also be an alternate pressing. If I ever get the guide written for the wiki, I have an example of such a disc.

This post has been edited by korth: Oct 27 2012, 18:45


--------------------
korth
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Porcus
post Oct 28 2012, 12:41
Post #2027





Group: Members
Posts: 1842
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207



QUOTE (korth @ Oct 27 2012, 18:58) *
Since CTDB started per-track verification, all rip results from CUERipper and the EAC plugin are submitted but repair data is only supposed to be accepted for good rips.


I run the most recent CUETools.exe on my dBpoweramp rips, and it submits. At least it claims to do. So I don't know what my rips are compared to. (If I have toyed around with it for quite some time ... what prevents it form comparing to my own submissions?)


--------------------
One day in the Year of the Fox came a time remembered well
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
korth
post Oct 28 2012, 14:05
Post #2028





Group: Members
Posts: 416
Joined: 13-March 11
Member No.: 88969



As I already mentioned, the most recent CUETools only submits to CTDB if AR confidence is greater than 1 AND no existing entry is found for that disc in the CTDB.
If CUETools submitted after verify then AR confidence was 2 or more and no entry was found in the CTDB to compare your rip with. If you verify again and CUETools finds one CTDB entry, then yes that entry is the one you just submitted. Don't trust (1/x) results.
If dBpoweramp submitted your original rip to AR then your rip was likely one of the 2 or more AR matches found that triggered CUETools to submit.

BTW, the current CTDB will only accept a submission from CUETools if a record for that disc doesn't exist in the db so if you did use an older version of CUETools, the submission will be rejected if a record for that disc already exists.
Gregory has plans to remove the AR dependent submit feature from CUETools. The CTDB will then only accept submissions from CUERipper and the EAC plugin.

This post has been edited by korth: Oct 28 2012, 14:53


--------------------
korth
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
korth
post Oct 29 2012, 00:27
Post #2029





Group: Members
Posts: 416
Joined: 13-March 11
Member No.: 88969



QUOTE (Porcus @ Oct 27 2012, 14:52) *
Re CD-extras:
I do lookups using the AccurateRip ID (dBpoweramp tags with those, I extract an ACCURATERIPID tag from that). However, CUETools then returns the error “Index was out of range. Must be non-negative and less than the size of the collection.
Parameter name: index.”

when I check the CUEToolsDB box. And then the log ends abruptly.

If I uncheck that and only attempt verifying by AccurateRip, I get a proper log (at least this far), so it is only a minor nuissance though.
This sounds like the 'detailed log' bug in the early version of 2.1.4. This was fixed without a version bump 11 JUL 2012. If you didn't download CUETools after 11 JUL 2012, please grab a fresh copy and try again. The alternative to unticking the CUEToolsDB box in the earlier build of 2.1.4 would be setting Detailed log to false.


--------------------
korth
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Porcus
post Oct 29 2012, 07:12
Post #2030





Group: Members
Posts: 1842
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207



Ah. Version bump. So that bug affects the Verify functionality and not only Repair. Thx.


--------------------
One day in the Year of the Fox came a time remembered well
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DT5
post Oct 31 2012, 10:12
Post #2031





Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 9-October 12
Member No.: 103738



I use CUETools and do an encode. The 'Select the best match' window pops up.
It seems so whether I cannot remove the comment line. Editing it and keep it empty does not seem to work.

Is there a way to embed a cuesheet into a flac file without reencoding?
Or reencode and let the original cue untouched?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
korth
post Oct 31 2012, 22:53
Post #2032





Group: Members
Posts: 416
Joined: 13-March 11
Member No.: 88969



QUOTE
I use CUETools and do an encode. The 'Select the best match' window pops up.
It seems so whether I cannot remove the comment line. Editing it and keep it empty does not seem to work.
Depends on which 'best match' you select, if the source file(s) have tags and tagging settings. This is a legend for the icons:

QUOTE
Is there a way to embed a cuesheet into a flac file without reencoding?
Not currently
QUOTE
Or reencode and let the original cue untouched?
Select CUE as Input. Select CUE data as 'best match'. Uncheck 'Fill up missing CUE data from tags'. Also uncheck 'Write AccurateRip tags' on AccurateRip tab under Encode and verify.


--------------------
korth
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DT5
post Nov 2 2012, 10:35
Post #2033





Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 9-October 12
Member No.: 103738



QUOTE (korth @ Oct 31 2012, 22:53) *
QUOTE
I use CUETools and do an encode. The 'Select the best match' window pops up.
It seems so whether I cannot remove the comment line. Editing it and keep it empty does not seem to work.
Depends on which 'best match' you select, if the source file(s) have tags and tagging settings.


I think i was not clear enough. I use mainly the data from Musicbrainz. Sometimes I edit tags - this works fine.
But when I delete a tag (remove the entry data) then it shows up at first as empty but the data was not removed.
I have to add a space ' '.
But then in the cue sheet is written REM COMMENT " ".

I delete only comment lines.

So I think that this is buggy.
Doesn't it make sense to trim all data-tags (each line if them if it is a multi-line entry)?

This post has been edited by DT5: Nov 2 2012, 10:36
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
korth
post Nov 2 2012, 13:38
Post #2034





Group: Members
Posts: 416
Joined: 13-March 11
Member No.: 88969



If you are trying to remove an existing comment from an embedded CUE, uncheck 'Copy basic tags'.
Note: I haven't seen a Musicbrainz entry that contains a non-blank 'Comment' field. Can you provide CTDB TOCID?

This post has been edited by korth: Nov 2 2012, 13:53


--------------------
korth
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DT5
post Nov 2 2012, 14:41
Post #2035





Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 9-October 12
Member No.: 103738



You could be right. Since I use mainly the data from Musicbrainz and sometimes (when Musicbrainz does not have the right data) Discogs the comment fields could appear really only in that case.
I did not realise till now that it had something to do with it

If I disable 'Copy basic tags' then nothing will ever be copied - right? Also not the label data?
And we talk about the data in the cue-sheet (incl the embedded cue-sheet) and in the flac-tags too?

What does
QUOTE
Copy unknown tags {checkbox}
Input audio file unknown tags are copied to output audio file tags.

exactly mean. Unknown to whom? CueTools?
Does this mean that all non-standard tags stay untouched?


Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
korth
post Nov 2 2012, 19:46
Post #2036





Group: Members
Posts: 416
Joined: 13-March 11
Member No.: 88969



QUOTE
If I disable 'Copy basic tags' then nothing will ever be copied - right?
You can create profiles with different settings.
QUOTE
Also not the label data?
If the source audio file has the LABELNO tag and the Musicbrainz entry is blank then unchecking 'Copy basic tags' will prevent that tag from being filled from the original file tag data. If the Musicbrainz entry has a value (or you edit it), that value will be written to the encoded audio file tags.
QUOTE
And we talk about the data in the cue-sheet (incl the embedded cue-sheet) and in the flac-tags too?
'Copy basic tags' refers to copying source audio file tags. The Embedded cue is an audio file tag. 'CUE data' is being filled from the Embedded cue but the Embedded cue is still a tag.
QUOTE
What does 'Copy unknown tags' exactly mean? Does this mean that all non-standard tags stay untouched?
'Unknown tags' refers to unrecognized or custom audio file tags. Checking this will copy custom tags such as MYCUSTOMTAG from the source audio file tags to the encoded audio file tags.


--------------------
korth
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DT5
post Nov 4 2012, 16:13
Post #2037





Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 9-October 12
Member No.: 103738



I have now another problem:

I ripped a CD (using EAC) and the disc contains errors. After cleaning the disc I tried again. But CUETools submitted the data already to the database. Is there a way to let them delete?

What I don't understand - I always thought that the database was only accepting errorfree rips:

1st rip:

QUOTE
Range quality 99.5 %
Copy CRC D3F54EEF
Copy finished

There were errors

...

---- CUETools DB Plugin V2.1.4

[CTDB TOCID: CW4hlOgf7ZU9LaI34SGheEIRAV0-] found
Submit result: CW4hlOgf7ZU9LaI34SGheEIRAV0- has been uploaded
Track | CTDB Status
1 | (0/1) No match
2 | (0/1) No match
3 | (0/1) No match


2nd rip:

QUOTE
Range quality 99.6 %
Copy CRC D0822047
Copy finished

There were errors

...

---- CUETools DB Plugin V2.1.4

[CTDB TOCID: CW4hlOgf7ZU9LaI34SGheEIRAV0-] found
Submit result: CW4hlOgf7ZU9LaI34SGheEIRAV0- has been uploaded
Track | CTDB Status
1 | (1/2) Differs in 4764 samples @03:29:14-03:29:15,03:29:24,03:29:33-03:29:34,03:29:43,03:29:52-03:29:53,03:29:71-03:29:72,03:30:05-03:30:06,03:30:24-03:30:25,03:30:34-03:30:35,03:30:43-03:30:44,03:30:53,03:30:62-03:30:63,03:30:71-03:30:72,03:31:06-03:31:07,03:31:15-03:31:16,03:31:25-03:31:26,03:31:34-03:31:35,03:31:44-03:31:45,03:31:53-03:31:54,03:31:62-03:31:63,03:31:72-03:31:73,03:32:06-03:32:07,03:32:16-03:32:17,03:32:25-03:32:26,03:32:35-03:32:36,03:32:44-03:32:45,03:32:54,03:32:63-03:32:64,03:32:72-03:32:73,03:33:07-03:33:08,03:33:16-03:33:17,03:33:26-03:33:27,03:33:35-03:33:36,03:33:45-03:33:46,03:33:54-03:33:55,03:33:64,03:33:73-03:33:74,03:34:07-03:34:08,03:34:17-03:34:18,03:34:26-03:34:27,03:34:36-03:34:37,03:35:36-03:35:37,03:35:46-03:35:47
2 | (2/2) Accurately ripped
3 | (2/2) Accurately ripped
If you are sure that your rip contains errors, you can use CUETools to repair it.


3rd rip:

QUOTE
Range quality 99.5 %
Test CRC DD42EF3B
Copy CRC 32FCA2E7
Copy finished

There were errors

...

---- CUETools DB Plugin V2.1.4

[CTDB TOCID: CW4hlOgf7ZU9LaI34SGheEIRAV0-] found
Submit result: insufficient quality
Track | CTDB Status
1 | (1/3) Differs in 5219 samples @03:28:05,03:28:52,03:29:14-03:29:15,03:29:24,03:29:33-03:29:34,03:29:43-03:29:44,03:29:52-03:29:53,03:29:71,03:30:05-03:30:06,03:30:24-03:30:25,03:30:34-03:30:35,03:30:43-03:30:44,03:30:53,03:30:62-03:30:63,03:30:71-03:30:72,03:31:06-03:31:07,03:31:15-03:31:16,03:31:25-03:31:26,03:31:34-03:31:35,03:31:44-03:31:45,03:31:53-03:31:54,03:31:62-03:31:63,03:31:72-03:31:73,03:32:06-03:32:07,03:32:16-03:32:17,03:32:25-03:32:26,03:32:35-03:32:36,03:32:44-03:32:45,03:32:54,03:32:63-03:32:64,03:32:72-03:32:73,03:33:07-03:33:08,03:33:16-03:33:17,03:33:26-03:33:27,03:33:35-03:33:36,03:33:45-03:33:46,03:33:54-03:33:55,03:33:64,03:33:73-03:33:74,03:34:07-03:34:08,03:34:17-03:34:18,03:34:26-03:34:27,03:34:36-03:34:37, or (1/3) differs in 1501 samples @03:28:05,03:28:52,03:29:14-03:29:15,03:29:43-03:29:44,03:29:71-03:29:72,03:30:05-03:30:06,03:30:34,03:30:71-03:30:72,03:31:25,03:31:34-03:31:35,03:31:44-03:31:45,03:31:53-03:31:54,03:31:62-03:31:63,03:31:72-03:31:73,03:32:06-03:32:07,03:32:26,03:32:35,03:32:54,03:32:63-03:32:64,03:32:72-03:32:73,03:33:16-03:33:17,03:33:26-03:33:27,03:33:46,03:33:54-03:33:55,03:33:64,03:34:08,03:35:36-03:35:37,03:35:46-03:35:47
2 | (3/3) Accurately ripped
3 | (3/3) Accurately ripped
If you are sure that your rip contains errors, you can use CUETools to repair it.


Why the 2 first rips were accepted and the last one not?
Why was I able to upload more than once the data? (or was it only CUEripper which prevented that?)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
korth
post Nov 4 2012, 16:36
Post #2038





Group: Members
Posts: 416
Joined: 13-March 11
Member No.: 88969



This is a known issue with the EAC plugin.
All three rip results were submitted but the first two rips included repair data and the third did not. If the plugin was working as expected, none of the submitted results would include repair data. It is recommended to avoid doing a repair when the CTDB confidence is only 1/x.

This post has been edited by korth: Nov 4 2012, 16:46


--------------------
korth
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
korth
post Nov 4 2012, 18:55
Post #2039





Group: Members
Posts: 416
Joined: 13-March 11
Member No.: 88969



QUOTE
Why was I able to upload more than once the data?
The CTDB ID (CRC32) was different so they weren't considered duplicates. The CTDB would reject duplicate results from the same user.
QUOTE
Why the 2 first rips were accepted and the last one not?
The first two were ripped in 'Copy' mode which allowed the known issue in the plugin to submit. The third was ripped in 'Test & Copy' mode and EAC was able to report to the plugin that the range 'Test and Copy' CRC's didn't match so the plugin did not submit based on that. Please ignore my statement above that all three were submitted. Only the first two were. It was too late to edit my original post.
QUOTE
I ripped a CD (using EAC) and the disc contains errors. After cleaning the disc I tried again. But CUETools submitted the data already to the database. Is there a way to let them delete?
The database will purge the confidence 1 records in time if additional matches aren't submitted and when other records for that disc exist with high confidence levels.

This post has been edited by korth: Nov 4 2012, 18:59


--------------------
korth
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DT5
post Nov 5 2012, 07:08
Post #2040





Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 9-October 12
Member No.: 103738



QUOTE (korth @ Nov 4 2012, 18:55) *
The database will purge the confidence 1 records in time if additional matches aren't submitted and when other records for that disc exist with high confidence levels.

The disc is from 1991 - i doubt that there will be soon additional entries.
So I gave up already my hope that I will be able to repair the disc.

So it is the best for the database if we would always use only the 'test & copy'-mode?
In that case accurate stream is also not important anymore?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
eahm
post Nov 17 2012, 23:50
Post #2041





Group: Members
Posts: 1033
Joined: 11-February 12
Member No.: 97076



I have a request, could you change the default archive of CUETools on the website from RAR to ZIP? I think it's more professional, more compatible with Windows and other systems and it doesn't need any installation of third party software.

Thanks.

This post has been edited by eahm: Nov 17 2012, 23:51
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Anakunda
post Nov 18 2012, 11:06
Post #2042





Group: Members
Posts: 450
Joined: 24-November 08
Member No.: 63072



I have bug report. Sometimes ISRC fields are left out from new CUEsheet if they exist in source cuesheet and copied logfile is sometimes converted from Unicode to ANSI. This is generally bad especially for EAC 1.0beta and newer logs whose are generated in Unicode and fail to be checked if in ANSI.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ClashRocker
post Nov 19 2012, 09:03
Post #2043





Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 9-June 11
Member No.: 91377



QUOTE (eahm @ Nov 17 2012, 23:50) *
I have a request, could you change the default archive of CUETools on the website from RAR to ZIP? I think it's more professional, more compatible with Windows and other systems and it doesn't need any installation of third party software.

Thanks.


+1 This....

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ClashRocker
post Nov 19 2012, 09:10
Post #2044





Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 9-June 11
Member No.: 91377



Have a problem with CueRipper.

I am ripping music to "My Music" folder, and it doesn't add tags to any music. I am using Google Music Manager to upload the music to the cloud, and everything is untagged and appears online as "unknown artist", "unknown album".

Looking at the files on disk, they too don't have any tags in them. Tried multiple formats, all the same result.

Here is what I think it happening.

CueRipper only tags items at the end of ripping when in track mode. Some music had already been seen by Google Music Manager and is already being uploaded. When the last track is ripped, it tries to write the tags, but one of the files is locked (by GMM), so the whole tagging operation is aborted.

Are there any plans on making an alternative strategy to combat these kinds of problems? ( For example: Rip to a temp dir, tag when track complete not disk complete, then copy to destination?)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ClashRocker
post Nov 21 2012, 19:32
Post #2045





Group: Members
Posts: 15
Joined: 9-June 11
Member No.: 91377



Cheesy workaround time.

A batch file containing the following:

CODE
pskill -t "MusicManager.exe"
psexec "C:\Program Files\CUETools\CUERipper.exe"
psexec -d "C:\Documents and Settings\June_2\Local Settings\Application Data\Programs\Google\MusicManager\MusicManager.exe"


Need to download pstools from Microsoft:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinte...s/bb896683.aspx

It shuts down Google MusicManager and then launches CueTools, waits for it to exit and then runs it again. Created a shortcut on the desktop called it CueTools, changed the icon to use the CueTools icon, and set the window state to start a minimized.

This post has been edited by ClashRocker: Nov 21 2012, 19:32
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Gregory S. Chudo...
post Nov 21 2012, 20:18
Post #2046





Group: Developer
Posts: 690
Joined: 2-October 08
From: Ottawa
Member No.: 59035



Nice one smile.gif Although there is more and more software that likes to watch music folders and index/upload as soon as something is modified, so i guess CUETools should lock or hide the files until it's done with them


--------------------
CUETools 2.1.4
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DT5
post Nov 22 2012, 19:59
Post #2047





Group: Members
Posts: 24
Joined: 9-October 12
Member No.: 103738



QUOTE (eahm @ Nov 17 2012, 23:50) *
I have a request, could you change the default archive of CUETools on the website from RAR to ZIP? I think it's more professional, more compatible with Windows and other systems and it doesn't need any installation of third party software.

Thanks.


Zip is certainly less professional but more compatible.
RAR has its advantages over zip.
But who is really still zipping something (I mean real files not container like docx)?
RAR or 7Z - that's the only question if size matters.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Porcus
post Nov 22 2012, 20:46
Post #2048





Group: Members
Posts: 1842
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207



If users need to get themselves a copy of (the free!) 7-Zip application in order to open (the free!) CUETools packed in a way that cuts Sir Chudov's bandwidth bill, then that's not too much of a sacrifice.


Besides, 7-Zip Is Good For You. Inter alia, because it teaches users that .zip ain't just .zip, and that you shouldn't believe Ballmerware that insinuates that your .zip is corrupted. No, .zip isn't that compatible.


--------------------
One day in the Year of the Fox came a time remembered well
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
eahm
post Nov 22 2012, 21:29
Post #2049





Group: Members
Posts: 1033
Joined: 11-February 12
Member No.: 97076



QUOTE (DT5 @ Nov 22 2012, 11:59) *
QUOTE (eahm @ Nov 17 2012, 23:50) *
I have a request, could you change the default archive of CUETools on the website from RAR to ZIP? I think it's more professional, more compatible with Windows and other systems and it doesn't need any installation of third party software.

Thanks.


Zip is certainly less professional but more compatible.
RAR has its advantages over zip.
But who is really still zipping something (I mean real files not container like docx)?
RAR or 7Z - that's the only question if size matters.

Why less professional? I only use 7-Zip but I just want to know.
What advantages other than compress few files together? Certainly not the speed.
"EVERYONE" uses Zip because of its Windows, OSX, Linux/BSD integration.

QUOTE (Porcus @ Nov 22 2012, 12:46) *
Besides, 7-Zip Is Good For You. Inter alia, because it teaches users that .zip ain't just .zip, and that you shouldn't believe Ballmerware that insinuates that your .zip is corrupted. No, .zip isn't that compatible.

7z = 1.46MB, RAR = 1.61MB, Zip = 2.14MB. I understand you can save some money but why use a proprietary and worse option that the open source one (7-Zip) if you really want to use "the lightest"? Also Zip of course is the best for compatibility because Windows, OSX and almost every distribution of Linux and BSD have it integrated in the system, when I have to suggest CUETools to middle age friends and they don't even know how to open the downloaded file everything stops there for me. I have to repack it in Zip, upload it on some file upload service and email them back the link.

If I don't do that and they rush on Google trying to find how to open a RAR file they may be redirected to non official websites or compatible software with malwares and toolbars. It all comes back to you and the time you have to waste apologizing because of the suggestion and the time again wasted fixing their system. Is it really about the bandwidth? I know this is extreme but if you just upload the damn Zip they'll be fine with the default Windows extractor, since Windows XP.

When you have customers you use common file extensions: PDF, Zip (not RAR, 7z), DOC/DOCX (not ODT) etc.

This post has been edited by eahm: Nov 22 2012, 21:49
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Porcus
post Nov 22 2012, 22:19
Post #2050





Group: Members
Posts: 1842
Joined: 30-November 06
Member No.: 38207



You seem to think that «file extension» is the same as «format». It isn't. ".zip" and ".zip" are not the same. There are .zip files that Windows can natively read, and there are .zip files that Windows cannot read and will suggest that are broken, when the problem is that the file format isn't supported. That is not compatibility. It is even worse than usual incompatibility, because it doesn't give the user a single clue that the issue is incompatibility and not corruption.

".doc" and ".doc" are not the same. A ".doc" file may look totally different on two computers, even two Windows-equipped computers with Microsoft Word. And yes, even with the same versions of Microsoft Word, but with different local configuration. That issue isn't even fixed with .docx, not even with Microsoft Word 2010. Not as of November 10th, at least >:-(

".odt" and ".odt" are not the same, but at least there aren't that many variants. And anything that can read .docx , can read .odt. ".rtf" and ".rtf" are not the same either, but less of an issue than .doc or .docx.

".pdf" and ".pdf" are not the same, and may very well look different on two computers. But in the very least Adobe gives some guidance on what to save as for archival purposes, which is a specification sufficient to grant unique appearance.

This post has been edited by Porcus: Nov 22 2012, 22:20


--------------------
One day in the Year of the Fox came a time remembered well
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

101 Pages V  « < 80 81 82 83 84 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th July 2014 - 10:17