Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Why bother with CUE sheets? (Read 3636 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Why bother with CUE sheets?

I did search on the term "Cue sheets" and didn't find what I was looking for.

If FLAC files are gapless, then what's the difference b/t using a Cue sheet and just ripping the files individually into FLAC and then putting them into the correct order when I decide to write my CD-R. Shouldn't both methods yield the same CD-R?

Why bother with CUE sheets?

Reply #1 –
I would think so.  I've never noticed a problem. 

If your flac files are tagged with the track numbers, then the order should come out right automagically when you add them to the burning program.  At least it does with Burnatonce.  It also picks up track titles etc if you are burning with CDTEXT.

Why bother with CUE sheets?

Reply #2 –
Cue sheet also stores indexes and pregaps of the original CD preserving original layout accurately. Pregap before first track can also be "hidden track" on some CDs which you'll lose if you just rip each tracks separately.

Why bother with CUE sheets?

Reply #3 –
I don't know that I've ever had a CD with indeces.  My first couple of CD players supported the concept, but I don't think most current models do.
Aren't the normal track gaps reflected in the individual flac files already?

Why bother with CUE sheets?

Reply #4 –
Quote
Aren't the normal track gaps reflected in the individual flac files already?

There is more than one way a gap can be represented on a CD. Usually a CD player will count down the timer in the pre-gap zone. Many of my CDs have that "feature", I would say about half of them.

Not that this is an important feature, but if you want to reproduce the original CD perfectly, it is indispensible.

Why bother with CUE sheets?

Reply #5 –
I'm not a real expert on the internal representation, but I thought I read somewhere that the countdown for track X represents the difference betweenthe TOC time for (X-1) and the actual length of (X-1)  (that is, up to the start of X).  Don't most rippers put that extra time
onto the (X-1) extracted file?
 

Why bother with CUE sheets?

Reply #6 –
I don't know how it's done on the CD, but in the CUE-sheet it is represented by track indices, e.g.:
Code: [Select]
  TRACK 04 AUDIO
    TITLE "Track04"
    PERFORMER "Unknown Artist"
    INDEX 00 44:22:74
    INDEX 01 44:33:22

The music starts at 44:33 after a 10 second gap to the last track.