similar to: [Flac-users] new stripping options

Thank you very much for the explanations, Josh. | the seekpoints are not the only places in the stream that can | be seeked to, they are just hints about regular locations in | the stream. you can still seek to any sample. the number of | seekpoints are just one factor in determining how fast the | decoder can find any particular sample. I did a lot of testing | before deciding on -S10s. So

2007/10/15, David W. Tamkin <dattier@panix.com>: > > Harry, > > > so i was wondering what advantages it could give me to make a ffp > > file, because there is already a internally stored md5 checksum on the > > decoded audio data inside the flac file? > > Testing the .flac file against its internally stored fingerprint lets > you know that you have a

Thank you for the new release, Josh. I've downloaded it, but some of the details in the history file puzzle me, so I've not tried to use it yet. Pardon my denseness here ... First, as long as you don't use the --cuesheet option when you encode, are .flac files encoded by 1.1.0 still readable by earlier versions? Second, if the old default for seekpoints was -S100x and the new one is

Josh explained, > search for "subset" on http://flac.sf.net/format.html > (I'll make a link in the documentation to it). That was over my head -- not the post, but the information at that URL. Does it mean that a non-Subset FLAC file isn't streamable, that a decoder can't read successive parts of the FLAC file and generate successive parts of the WAV?

This may be more a question about the pseudo-DOS command line than about flac itself, but at this point I don't really know. How can one direct the output of flac -t to a file instead of the screen? Often I'd like to verify a large number of flac files, and Speek's front-end is very good for writing up the batch file for that (flac -t itself doesn't seem to expand wildcards on

If one is running flac under Windows and invoking it at a command.com prompt, does flac -t return an exit status that command.com can use to determine its next move (such as logging whether the flac file being tested passed or failed)? Meanwhile, I discovered the pause command; by editing that into the batch file between invocations of flac -t, at least I won't miss any results before they

When I asked, | > If you're going to run flac -t later to test | > the .flac file, isn't it redundant to have verification on during | > encoding? Fearless Leader Ace Coalson responded, | yep. OK. | > If you know ... that -V was used | > during encoding and that flac reported "Verify OK," is there any | > reason to test the file? | nope, unless you suspect

First, many thanks to Kerry Hoath (and some to a friend who is not on this list, but mostly to Kerry) for help with my batch file question. It's working, pretty much, but I'm still tweaking it, and I'll share the results when it's polished to my satisfaction. Related question: according to the longer help file, if you use the "verify" option during encoding, flac checks

Early this past week, Miroslav Lichvar suggested for me: > Ok, you need 0.04% improvement, that should not be a problem. Try > flac --lax -e -p -l 32 -r 10 --no-padding Thank you again, Miroslav. I tried that, and it took almost two full days (surprisingly, Windows ME stayed up that long without crashing) to re-encode the entire set on my 266-MHz machine. After all, in the help file

An enthusiastic FLAC user on another list to which I subscribe said that FLAC has a function to display on screen the stored fingerprint that a FLAC file has of its source WAV. That sounds wonderful, because it allows a user to see whether two differing FLAC files might come from the same WAV but have been compressed with different sets of options, and therefore they would decompress to identical

Miroslav Lichvar wrote: > Ok, you need 0.04% improvement, that should not be a problem. Perhaps a little more than that, since the sizes I listed were after stripping out the padding and all metadata blocks except SEEKTABLE and STREAMINFO. > Try flac --lax -e -p -l 32 -r 10 --no-padding > and if it is not enough, increase -r up to 16. Thank you. I'll do that. What, though,

Two wavs I tried to encode tonight got errors near their ends, saying something like "skipped unknown sub-chunk 'LIST'." These occurred at 97% into one file and 98% into the other. If I hadn't brought the DOS command window to the foreground and hadn't been at the monitor watching before these warnings were scrolled away by the displays from work on other files in the

make sure to use --ogg when encoding: flac -V --ogg -o file.ogg file.wav --- Keith <keith105@yahoo.com> wrote: > I am running flac 1.1.0 under Fedora Core 1 Linux and have encoded a > .wav file using the following command: > flac -V -o file.ogg file.wav > I then try to decode it with the following command: > flac -d -o file2.wav file.ogg > and

I'd like to start using the tagging function for my FLAC files instead of trying to include the song title in the filename or having to refer to a text file while I listen. Is there a tutorial for tagging? I've absolutely no idea how to get started or where to learn. Thank you.

Dat Head wrote: > I use it all the time for wav to flac conversions for CDR burning (doesn't > everybody?!) or maybe i use it with shntool before encoding to flac, I'm pretty sure (don't have the code and couldn't read it if I had it) that shntool's "fix" module doesn't use flac's --sector-align option but has its own routines. For one thing,

When you maximize the window, the position of the Fingerprint button doesn't adjust; the Help function still scrolls the first two screenfuls together without a break, so that the first screenful is impossible to read; not sure how, but the first time I tried it, it locked up and couldn't close (needed a three-finger salute). This is under WindowsME on a vintage 1998 266MHz Pentium II.

since I've been getting a lot of requests, we're planning to do a run of FLAC shirts at cost if there is enough real demand. there's also a slogan contest for what goes on the back. for details see http://flac.sourceforge.net/tshirt.html check it out! Josh __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail for Mobile Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile

hi, i found this explanation of the flac fingerprint somewhere: 'A FLAC Fingerprint is generated only for the audio data portion of the file. (Therefore, changing the filename or the tags or FlacMetadata does not change the fingerprint calculation.) In contrast, an .md5 is generated against the whole file, including header portions.' so i was wondering what advantages it could give me

--- "Paino, Christopher L YN1(AW) (CPF N0084)" <PainoCL@cpf.navy.mil> wrote: > If I am understanding FLAC correctly, the internal MD5 sum is (or can > be > )different than the fingerprint file sum. Yes. > The internal sum can be > different > depending on which compression settings are used, while the audio > remains > unchanged. It's the other way

--- "David W. Tamkin" <dattier@panix.com> wrote: > Thank you very much for the explanations, Josh. > > | the seekpoints are not the only places in the stream that can > | be seeked to, they are just hints about regular locations in > | the stream. you can still seek to any sample. the number of > | seekpoints are just one factor in determining how fast the >