Skip to main content

Topic: Would you compromise 1:1? (Read 3464 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • blue57
  • [*]
Would you compromise 1:1?
Just wondering how much emphasis is put on 1:1 copying when aesthetic reasoning would be better.

In the case where a song ends a fraction of a second after the next track has started, would you cut the audio from the start of the next track and paste it at the end of the track it should be in?

A good example is Opeth's songs Closure and Hope Leaves. If ripped exactly, the start of Hope Leaves track will have a short blip - which is the very end of Closure. These tracks are not connected musically in any way, so I see no problem with editing (and even burning) the wav's to contain their intended audio.

Discuss

  • markanini
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Would you compromise 1:1?
Reply #1
Have you ripped th cd with the drive offest corrected? An uncorrected offset can make a track transition come to early or to late.

  • timcupery
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Would you compromise 1:1?
Reply #2
I'm completely with you on this point. When I rip wav files, I will trim off silence at the beginning of the file before encoding, or in the case of songs where there is no gap in between (e.g., Live recordings, lots of Pink Floyd Stuff, and Opeth as you mention, and lots of other things) I often do some wav-data copy and pasting so that the tracks begin and end at the logical point (rather than having 0.4266 seconds of applause before the first guitar chord, or the short blip at the beginning that is really the end of the previous track).

However, I still view what I am doing as 1:1 copying - the wav data that I'm encoding is unchanged (except when I trip half-a-second or less of silence from the beinning of a track), I'm just splitting the tracks at a more logical point. This wouldn't be an issue if all pressed cd's split their tracks at the correct point, but most of them don't.

Of course, Ubernet would have a huge beef with my method 
God kills a kitten every time you encode with CBR 320

  • AtaqueEG
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Would you compromise 1:1?
Reply #3
Quote
Have you ripped th cd with the drive offest corrected? An uncorrected offset can make a track transition come to early or to late.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=319642"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


It would have to be a very, very big offser fot such a thing to be noticed.

One example on my collection is on an album by Babasonicos, a band from Argentina. The fourth track, "Estertor" ends a fraction of a second into the next track "Putita".

No offset problem, it plays the same from the CD.

In my reasoning, the artist, for some reason, wanted it to be like this. Who are we to mess with that?
I'm the one in the picture, sitting on a giant cabbage in Mexico, circa 1978.
Reseñas de Rock en Español: www.estadogeneral.com

  • timcupery
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Would you compromise 1:1?
Reply #4
Quote
Have you ripped th cd with the drive offest corrected? An uncorrected offset can make a track transition come to early or to late.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=319642"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

In most such cases, the offset is a function of the pressed cd, not of the cd-drive (which will rarely have an offset of more than a few frames, which is basically negligable).

Sometimes the offset is a really lot (where it's the fault of the cd-pressing, but at least the error is consistent - for example, I've got a disc where the tracks all begin 0.6 seconds earlier than they should, so sometimes you hear the end of the previous song.

More commonly, the track-splitting doesn't have a consistent offset, but is rather just the result of carelessness, and thus takes more work to correct before encoding.

Quote
In my reasoning, the artist, for some reason, wanted it to be like this. Who are we to mess with that?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=319644"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Sure - if they meant it that way. But most of the time, such offset issues aren't intentional, but are rather the result of careless track-splitting and spacing on the part of the audio engineer.

Also, there's more reason to have tracks split cleanly when they're encoded (because they're separate files, it makes sense for them to be separate, blah blah) as compared to on a cd, where everything is continuous, and the beginning of a new track means only that the cd player will jump to that point when you press "next".
God kills a kitten every time you encode with CBR 320

  • PoisonDan
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Would you compromise 1:1?
Reply #5
Quote
A good example is Opeth's songs Closure and Hope Leaves. If ripped exactly, the start of Hope Leaves track will have a short blip - which is the very end of Closure.[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=319640"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yep, I noticed the same problem, but I try to live with it.

OTOH, I made a compilation CD a while ago, and this CD also contained Hope Leaves. In this particular case, I did remove the blip at the beginning. But when ripping and playing the audio from the original CD, I just leave it as it is.

Another "offender" is A Warm Place from NIN's The Downward Spiral. This is a quiet song, but it contains a very small part from the previous track, Big Man With A Gun (which is a very loud song). So the small "noise burst" at the beginning is quite annoying.
Over thinking, over analyzing separates the body from the mind.

  • AtaqueEG
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
  • Members (Donating)
Would you compromise 1:1?
Reply #6
Quote
Sure - if they meant it that way. But most of the time, such offset issues aren't intentional, but are rather the result of careless track-splitting and spacing on the part of the audio engineer.


Yeah, but once the CD is pressed, it becomes "canon". Even it's mistakes (wherever they come from) are part of the whole thing.

I'll tell you what I do: I backup my CD's to lossless and transcode for portable use.
The lossless files go unaltered, but I do edit the MP3. Specially those you mention and those last album songs where a silence goes for some minutes and then another hidden song begins.

I get rid of the silence, and the hidden song gets treated as another track. But it is only for my lossy files.
I'm the one in the picture, sitting on a giant cabbage in Mexico, circa 1978.
Reseñas de Rock en Español: www.estadogeneral.com

  • timcupery
  • [*][*][*][*][*]
Would you compromise 1:1?
Reply #7
Quote
Yeah, but once the CD is pressed, it becomes "canon". Even it's mistakes (wherever they come from) are part of the whole thing.

I'll tell you what I do: I backup my CD's to lossless and transcode for portable use.
The lossless files go unaltered, but I do edit the MP3. Specially those you mention and those last album songs where a silence goes for some minutes and then another hidden song begins.
I get rid of the silence, and the hidden song gets treated as another track. But it is only for my lossy files.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=319655"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There are some mistakes that are endearing, and I guess that's diff for diff people, but if I can correct mistakes without too much work, I'll do it.
I'll actually do correction to lossless also, but if you want to be able to re-create the exact original, then your method makes sense.
I also make hidden tracks into their own tracks, and label the songs like so:
Artist--10_1--Main_Track.mp3
Artist--10_2--hidden_track.mp3
God kills a kitten every time you encode with CBR 320

  • Cyaneyes
  • [*][*][*][*]
Would you compromise 1:1?
Reply #8
I don't correct them.  I rarely listen to songs in shuffle, and when Rockbox comes out for my H340 (gapless), that reason to correct them will no longer exist.