On Mittwoch 09 Mai 2001 02:53, you wrote:> > > first I should say that it MIGHT not be because the file is > > > large. the wave reader in flac is pretty rudimentary and if there > > > is any sub chunk between the wave header and data sub chunk flac > > > will give you that error. could you inspect the wav file to see > > > if that's the case? > > > > Sorry, I dont know how to do this. Is it easy to explain me, a > > user? > > are you using windows or unix? on unix you can do something like: > > od -c file.wav | head -20 > > which will show you the first 100 or so characters. any non > printable ones will be in octal (like \003 for ctrl-c). compare the > subchunks you find against the wav format: > > http://www.borg.com/~jglatt/tech/wave.htm > > if it has a 'list' 'plst' 'cue ' 'labl' 'note' or any subchunk that > is not 'data' then flac will not parse it.ok, I found a "pad" subchunk. Is this the reason for flac to disagree with this file? If so, why flac doesnt ignore this subchunk? At http://www.borg.com/~jglatt/tech/wave.htm I read: All applications that use WAVE must be able to read the 2 required chunks and can choose to selectively ignore the optional chunks. A program that copies a WAVE should copy all of the chunks in the WAVE, even those it chooses not to interpret. Bye, Jan -------------- next part -------------- 0000000 R I F F l 034 Ð @ W A V E f m t 0000020 020 \0 \0 \0 001 \0 002 \0 200 » \0 \0 \0 î 002 \0 0000040 004 \0 020 \0 P A D Ì 017 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 0000060 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 * 0007760 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 d a t a t \f Ð @ 0010000 J \0 J \0 S \0 G \0 T \0 I \0 N \0 K \0 0010020 U \0 = \0 S \0 C \0 _ \0 < \0 [ \0 D \0 0010040 S \0 L \0 \ \0 G \0 W \0 I \0 S \0 K \0 0010060 R \0 L \0 Q \0 = \0 T \0 @ \0 X \0 M \0 0010100 Y \0 C \0 Y \0 ; \0 U \0 D \0 R \0 D \0 0010120 R \0 I \0 M \0 A \0 P \0 @ \0 W \0 H \0 0010140 M \0 B \0 S \0 C \0 V \0 E \0 U \0 H \0 0010160 P \0 B \0 Q \0 @ \0 S \0 : \0 S \0 A \0 0010200 W \0 D \0 S \0 C \0 T \0 D \0 P \0 : \0 0010220 V \0 @ \0 Q \0 C \0 W \0 @ \0 Q \0 A \0 0010240 N \0 E \0 P \0 C \0 P \0 E \0 V \0 O \0 0010260 R \0 H \0 V \0 F \0 R \0 F \0 \ \0 D \0 0010300 Q \0 C \0 U \0 G \0 U \0 K \0 L \0 F \0 0010320 M \0 F \0 I \0 G \0 K \0 ? \0 G \0 A \0
yes, the 'pad' chunk is what tripped up flac. I know that I need to add support to skip other chunks, but it's been lower on my list, and nobody else has submitted a patch. right now I'm only doing optimization work. after that I will probably get to this and a couple other flac requests. Josh --- Jan Suhr <jan.suhr@usa.net> wrote:> On Mittwoch 09 Mai 2001 02:53, you wrote: > > > > first I should say that it MIGHT not be because the file is > > > > large. the wave reader in flac is pretty rudimentary and if > there > > > > is any sub chunk between the wave header and data sub chunk > flac > > > > will give you that error. could you inspect the wav file to > see > > > > if that's the case? > > > > > > Sorry, I dont know how to do this. Is it easy to explain me, a > > > user? > > > > are you using windows or unix? on unix you can do something like: > > > > od -c file.wav | head -20 > > > > which will show you the first 100 or so characters. any non > > printable ones will be in octal (like \003 for ctrl-c). compare > the > > subchunks you find against the wav format: > > > > http://www.borg.com/~jglatt/tech/wave.htm > > > > if it has a 'list' 'plst' 'cue ' 'labl' 'note' or any subchunk that > > is not 'data' then flac will not parse it. > > ok, I found a "pad" subchunk. Is this the reason for flac to disagree > > with this file? If so, why flac doesnt ignore this subchunk? > At http://www.borg.com/~jglatt/tech/wave.htm I read: > > All applications that use WAVE must be able to read the 2 required > chunks and can choose to selectively ignore the optional chunks. A > program that copies a WAVE should copy all of the chunks in the WAVE, > > even those it chooses not to interpret. > > Bye, Jan> 0000000 R I F F l 034 Ð @ W A V E fm t> > 0000020 020 \0 \0 \0 001 \0 002 \0 200 » \0 \0 \0 î 002 > \0 > 0000040 004 \0 020 \0 P A D Ì 017 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 > \0 > 0000060 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 > \0 > * > 0007760 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 \0 d a t a t \f Ð > @ > 0010000 J \0 J \0 S \0 G \0 T \0 I \0 N \0 K > \0 > 0010020 U \0 = \0 S \0 C \0 _ \0 < \0 [ \0 D > \0 > 0010040 S \0 L \0 \ \0 G \0 W \0 I \0 S \0 K > \0 > 0010060 R \0 L \0 Q \0 = \0 T \0 @ \0 X \0 M > \0 > 0010100 Y \0 C \0 Y \0 ; \0 U \0 D \0 R \0 D > \0 > 0010120 R \0 I \0 M \0 A \0 P \0 @ \0 W \0 H > \0 > 0010140 M \0 B \0 S \0 C \0 V \0 E \0 U \0 H > \0 > 0010160 P \0 B \0 Q \0 @ \0 S \0 : \0 S \0 A > \0 > 0010200 W \0 D \0 S \0 C \0 T \0 D \0 P \0 : > \0 > 0010220 V \0 @ \0 Q \0 C \0 W \0 @ \0 Q \0 A > \0 > 0010240 N \0 E \0 P \0 C \0 P \0 E \0 V \0 O > \0 > 0010260 R \0 H \0 V \0 F \0 R \0 F \0 \ \0 D > \0 > 0010300 Q \0 C \0 U \0 G \0 U \0 K \0 L \0 F > \0 > 0010320 M \0 F \0 I \0 G \0 K \0 ? \0 G \0 A > \0 >__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/
--- Jan Suhr <jan.suhr@usa.net> wrote:> ok, I found a "pad" subchunk. Is this the reason for flac to disagree > > with this file? If so, why flac doesnt ignore this subchunk? > At http://www.borg.com/~jglatt/tech/wave.htm I read: > > All applications that use WAVE must be able to read the 2 required > chunks and can choose to selectively ignore the optional chunks. A > program that copies a WAVE should copy all of the chunks in the WAVE, > > even those it chooses not to interpret. >I finally got around to fixing this one too... flac will now ignore (with a warning) any unsupported sub-chunks. Josh __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/