IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
EAC - Wavpack Guides - Tag Error
flebber
post Feb 17 2012, 10:23
Post #1





Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 29-October 08
Member No.: 61268



HI I am reading different guides such as http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...Lossless_Backup

However the EAC command line parameters appear to be incorrect.

CODE
-h -w "Artist=%a" -w "Title=%t" -w "Album=%g" -w "Year=%y" -w "Track=%n" -w "Genre=%m" %s %d


Every time I try and use it it returns a 'Invalid tag replacement' error.

Is anyone using EAC to rip Wavpack? Have you got a work set of command line parameters to use?

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post Feb 17 2012, 13:32
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 3426
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



Tell us which version of EAC you are using. The parameters have changed.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
flebber
post Feb 17 2012, 13:49
Post #3





Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 29-October 08
Member No.: 61268



QUOTE (pdq @ Feb 17 2012, 23:32) *
Tell us which version of EAC you are using. The parameters have changed.

v 1.0 beta 3 I believe that's the latest one.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DARcode
post Feb 17 2012, 16:32
Post #4





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 682
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Italy
Member No.: 18968



http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?ti...#Important_note


--------------------
WavPack 4.70.0 -b384hx6cmv/qaac 2.43 -V 100
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
pdq
post Feb 17 2012, 16:49
Post #5





Group: Members
Posts: 3426
Joined: 1-September 05
From: SE Pennsylvania
Member No.: 24233



It really is time to update the wiki. The important note should instead be saying "This guide is for EAC version x.xx or later. If you have an older version then please update."
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
flebber
post Feb 17 2012, 21:46
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 29-October 08
Member No.: 61268



So this would be equivalent wavpack line for latest EAC?

CODE
-h -w "%artist%" --tt "%title%" --tl "%albumtitle%" --tg "%genre%" --ty "%year%" --tn "%tracknr%" --tc "%comment%" %source% %dest%
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
bryant
post Feb 17 2012, 21:59
Post #7


WavPack Developer


Group: Developer (Donating)
Posts: 1292
Joined: 3-January 02
From: San Francisco CA
Member No.: 900



No, I think it would be more like this (but I have not tried it):
CODE
-h -w "Artist=%artist%" -w "Title=%title%" -w "Album=%albumtitle%" -w "Year=%year%" -w "Track=%tracknr%" -w "Genre=%genre%" %source% %dest%

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
db1989
post Feb 17 2012, 22:01
Post #8





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 5275
Joined: 23-June 06
Member No.: 32180



flebber, your latest command-line uses the tagging parameters (except for the %artist%) of LAME, not WavPack. Was there something on the Knowledgebase that confused you and led to this mistake?

bryant’s correction uses the correct format, i.e. the same one as your original command-line. (Of course, he has updated the placeholders to match new versions of EAC.)

Speaking of placeholders: Here’s one I made earlier. wink.gif Edit: Which I have just added to the two articles linked earlier.

This post has been edited by db1989: Feb 17 2012, 22:23
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
flebber
post Feb 18 2012, 00:45
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 29-October 08
Member No.: 61268



Thank you when I get home will try. Should I use -hh -l wavpack options if I have the time for the encoding ?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
flebber
post Feb 18 2012, 01:55
Post #10





Group: Members
Posts: 13
Joined: 29-October 08
Member No.: 61268



QUOTE (flebber @ Feb 18 2012, 10:45) *
Thank you when I get home will try. Should I use -hh -l wavpack options if I have the time for the encoding ?


Am using
CODE
-hh -l -w "Artist=%artist%" -w "Title=%title%" -w "Album=%albumtitle%" -w "Year=%year%" -w "Track=%tracknr%" -w "Genre=%genre%" %source% %dest%

and it seems to be working well. thanks again.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
DARcode
post Feb 20 2012, 15:02
Post #11





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 682
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Italy
Member No.: 18968



QUOTE (flebber @ Feb 18 2012, 00:45) *
[...]Should I use -hh -l wavpack options if I have the time for the encoding ?
If enconding time is not an issue for you I'd strongly suggest to consider the "-x" switch too:

QUOTE
-x[n] = extra encode processing (optional n = 1-6, 1 = default)

Like pre-4.0 versions of WavPack (and many other compressors), WavPack 4.60 normally works "symmetrically" in that encoding and decoding operate at about the same rate (regardless of the mode used). However, WavPack has an option to work "asymmetrically", so that extra processing can be done during encoding to provide better compression, but with NO corresponding cost to decoding performance!

This is enabled with the -x option and provides an average improvement in CD music compression of about 1% in "fast" mode, about 0.5% in the normal mode, and still less in the higher modes. Because the standard compression parameters are optimized for "normal" CD music audio, this option works best with "non-standard" audio (synthesized sounds, non-standard sampling rates, etc.) where it can often achieve enormous gains. The default level (n=1) provides a decent improvement with little cost in encoding speed and is recommended for all but the most time critical encoding. Higher levels provide some marginal improvement with an increasing cost of encoding speed. The highest levels (n = 4-6) are extremely slow but can provide significant improvement in special situations (i.e. synthesized sounds).
From http://www.wavpack.com/wavpack_doc.html#wavpack


--------------------
WavPack 4.70.0 -b384hx6cmv/qaac 2.43 -V 100
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

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: 1st November 2014 - 05:52