Skip to main content
Recent Posts
3
General Audio / Re: Fake 24-bit FLAC?
Last post by kode54 -
It does, however, mean "Potentially perfect audio", in the sense that it technically could be a high quality input, but it may not be. It just means that if the source of the file is not lying about it being high quality, then the FLAC format itself won't damage the quality any more than the original source was already damaged in production.

Correct, it isn't some mystical guarantee of quality. What you put into it is exactly what you get out of it. Like archive formats that don't throw information away, it replicates its input exactly, with no additional loss. Recompressing it with these formats will also have no additional loss, and may only have added benefit of newer algorithms better compressing the data.

Garbage in, garbage out.
5
General - (fb2k) / Re: Skip Silence DSP accidentally enabled for months while ripping music
Last post by marcoxD95 -
I already looked through several albums from different genres and couldn't find a single example where artistical silence was removed... We are talking about over 100 checked tracks so I guess it is extremely rare. I did find silence in some tracks but it wasn't digital silence, more like white noise recording sounds. Of course there might be tracks where silence actually gets removed but I guess I don't care anymore. Theoretically I would re-rip too but I ripped quite a lot of CDs lately. Far over 200. So NOPE.

I did some experiments with silence and it seems like this -90db setting only seems to remove digital silence. I also tried to measure the loudness with different types of silences like vinyl, white noise, etc and nothing was cut away. This type of silence usually seems to be between 20-30db. Weirdly enough digital silence too but I am not sure if Audacity and MP3Gain gave me wrong db values or if it is just not measurable because it is digitally zero db but no idea... Maybe they also gave me back the value of a short clipping at the track start or end because nothing else was measurable. What does this -90db mean anyway? Does it take 100db as default value and anything below 10db gets cut away? Really wonder.

In the end I might just keep it but adjust it to -95to -99db, have to test around. Just to limit it really to digital noise only. Gotta check the results and if any of my over 100tracks show a difference in playlenght after re-encording it in flac. I have too much freetime...
Of course there might be tracks where the engineering or mastering of a track really is with artistical DIGITAL silence inside the track. In that case... Bad luck to you. Not like I would ever notice this, duh. Most seem to use white noise silence. Probably also up to how modern the track was produced/recorded.
6
CUETools / Re: Exception Track 2 INDEX 00 is 91:42:56 which is past the end of the source file
Last post by korth -
To use this CUE in CUETools you'll need to remove all the INDEX 00 lines from Track 02 to the end. Do not remove INDEX 00 from Track 01.
I wouldn't be too concerned about fixing this in EAC unless you continue to notice problems. The best settings for this particular CD may not be best for the majority of CDs you RIP.[1]
7
Opus / Re: Opus gapless and glitchness encoding
Last post by 40th.com -
It's still there.
I see a picture.  Anyway, if the idea here is that because of no overlap with a previous sample window you get this, then you get this with mp3, aac, vorbis.

How loud?  I imagine the headphone driver will break up more than anything.  I used headphones and heard nothing.  I also did fb2k 1.4 and heard nothing.  I turned the volume higher than I wanted and heard nothing, not at the b1/b2 transition.  I heard one artifact elsewhere, though.  Almost like a hot mic picking up aaaa pin drop (b1, around 1-sec mark).

You may have a TOS-violation-free picture there (j/k), but that doesn't mean that is audible.  Headphone driver(s) breaking up are much more likely.  Lame/itunes/oggenc results in what for these?  Is the original .flac around?
8
Opus / Re: Opus 1.3 is out!
Last post by Superior -
Different compilers - i understand, different optimization - i understand less. But doesn't it all describe how codec do his work, instead of what he do. I mean, I understand if compiler / optimization can increase the speed of the program, compatibility with new CPU instructions, etc. But i really don't understand how it can impact on the result of the program (opus algorithm in this case).
9
Opus / Re: Opus gapless and glitchness encoding
Last post by Case -
It's still there. Try with headphones and you have to have volume quite high. I see in the spectrogram that it's actually not only on the right channel but the error in the left channel is much quieter:
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2018