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: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.6 (Read 1905085 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #275 –
It doesn't work intuitively, at least...
audiophile // flac & wavpack, mostly // using too many audio players

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #276 –
It took a few minutes of my time to test the new interface and learn to use it, but I think it works fine for me.

I have found the Multiple mode very useful. I don't think I can use the Recursive mode because I often have more than one cue file in each album folder and I need to select the correct cue sheets before running a batch.

It would be nice if I could prepare other folders while cuetools is running a batch (I mean creating dummy cue sheets and fixing the filenames inside cue sheets). Would it be possible to allow multiple instances?

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #277 –
This is the first option in advanced settings.
CUETools 2.1.6

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #278 –
Oh, somehow I didn't notice it or stop to think what it means. Maybe "allow multiple instances" would have been clearer to me. I have seen that phrase in some other programs.

It seems to work fine. You have thought about everything. Thanks again.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #279 –
Just a post to let you know that there is a cosmetic bug if you use 125% fonts in Windows XP SP2. I enlighted it in red in the screenshot.



... it doesn't annoy me much as I can go back to normal fonts, but changing font size forces me to reboot ... so I just wanted to let you know in case it would be easy to fix.

I plan to switch to windows seven so it doesn't matter much anyway. Many programs have such bugs if you increase the fonts too much in XP, but at 125% it's usually OK. I don't have these bugs with any other programs at 125%.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #280 –
Quote from: Gregory S. Chudov on
...I'm currently testing how would it work without the 'recursive' checkbox.
...Maybe the 'multiple' mode should go too?
It seems to cause a lot of confusion, but doesn't seem to be very useful.
What if multimode is allways on. Than you can still select a folder or more folders. And it is also possible to select a few or one file.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #281 –
I've got ~600 cue sheets from EAC (noncompliant type) + ape files. I used the file name corrector that worked just fine. Now I have all my ape files tagged perfectly (dbpoweramp) but the Title and Perfomer Tags inside the cue sheets are not always correct. So I do want to update these fields from my ape tags.
I've once requested this:
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....st&p=609716
and in principle it does work. But I always need to let cue tools create a new cue sheet and beside this it seems that the stucture of the new cue sheet is a bit different from the original one (tried different cue style options).
What I would wish for is an additional option like "correct filenmes" eg "update title&performer" that only updates the performer and title tags of the selected cue sheets and leaves the rest of the cue sheet as it was.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #282 –
Always get error message: SHGetFolderLocation failed:



Output saved to desktop regardless of entered Output Path.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #283 –
Bugreport:
CUETools 2.0 X64
Vista X64

I have an album that consists of 12 alac (.m4a) files. Creating a dummy cuesheet and verifing against accuraterip works as it should.
But when I try to verify & encode to flac with embedded cuesheet I get the following application error and cuetools crashes:
Exception: Index was outside bounds of the array.

cuesheet used:
Code: [Select]
REM COMMENT "CUETools generated dummy CUE sheet"
FILE "01 Death To Los Campesinos!.m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 01 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "02 Broken Hearts Sounds Like Breakbe.m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 02 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "03 Don't Tell Me To Do The Math(s).m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 03 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "04 Drop It Doe Eyes.m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 04 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "05 My Year In Lists.m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 05 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "06 Knee Deep At ATP.m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 06 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "07 This Is How You Spell....m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 07 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "08 We Are All Accelerated Readers.m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 08 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "09 You! Me! Dancing!.m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 09 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "10 ...And We Exhale And Roll Our Eye.m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 10 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "11 Sweet Dreams, Sweet Cheeks.m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 11 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00
FILE "12 [Bonus Track].m4a" WAVE
  TRACK 12 AUDIO
    INDEX 01 00:00:00

After using foobar2000 to create a flac image of the alac files cuetools (re)encode's the flac image fine.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #284 –
Quote from: Scidd0w on
But when I try to verify & encode to flac with embedded cuesheet I get the following application error and cuetools crashes:

Thanks. Does it only happen in 'Verify, then encode mode' and not in 'Encode and verify' mode? Do you have 'Fix offset if..' option turned on in advanced settings?
CUETools 2.1.6

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #285 –
More stable 2.0.1 release available, including several bugfixes & enhancements.
* Reads buggy ffdshow-encoded m4a's
* Filesystem tree should work now with older OS/IE versions
* You can remove 'user_profiles_enabled' file from the application folder to keep your settings in the application folder
* Batch verification now shows brief summary for each album
* Replaygain info no longer removed
* 'recursive' button removed. Batch mode is now activated by selecting a folder.
* Localization can be selected in the settings
CUETools 2.1.6
 

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #286 –
One fine day I'll manage to resize the text labels correctly. 

Thanks for your quick update.
Still working great... and the new UI (the new button behavior) is a real improvement.

audiophile // flac & wavpack, mostly // using too many audio players

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #287 –
Request:
Plz add an option in order for the audio data to NOT be automatically padded if you convert separate files+cue to CDImage+cue & data does end on a CD frame boundary. Because I recently grabbed the NINJA 2009 Tour Sampler (EP) which is a free flac download, as the files are splitted I decided to create a dummie cue & then join the files using cuetools. I do this because all my collection is backed up as CDImage+cue, so I don't want any of my file to be splitted. With cuetools I add an error message with my audio getting padded. It may be nice to fix bad CD frame boundary as Cuesheet are normally made for burning. But this is not a CD, this is an Original Electronic Format release (OEF) & I don't intend to burn it as my cue is just a playlist. So padding is annoying in this case.

As there was no option to disable padding, I was forced to reinstall an old version of foobar to do the job (foobar2000 V0.9 did the trick).

You may argue that it doesn't matter & but for Nine Inch Nails - 2008 - The Slip (which is in the same case, free splitted OEF release) there is two release 16Bits & 24Bits, as cuetools doesn't support 24Bits I cannot add padding the 24Bits version, so if I would add padding only the 16Bits version ... the timing would not be the same in the two versions which is an idea that I dislike much, because it is the same CD. Furthermore, I can always add padding later  to the 16Bits version if ever I would intend to burn it, so it is not nice to always force the padding IMHO. Finally as far as I understund padding add silence, I compared the foobar2000 & cuetools cuesheets, starting at track 3 the audio was shifted by 1 second (Edit: Mistake 1 frame only), so if it would be a gapless live album it would break the gaplessness, which is also an idea that I dislike. (Edit: not really true with only 1 frame which is 1 second/75)

I hope you understund what I meant

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #288 –
Quote from: tuxman on
One fine day I'll manage to resize the text labels correctly. 

I doubt it, because i always spoil it  Don't worry, leave it to me. I intentionaly removed all size & position information from localizations, just forgot to resize the controls in the main resource.
CUETools 2.1.6

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #289 –
Quote from: sauvage78 on
But this is not a CD, this is an Original Electronic Format release (OEF) & I don't intend to burn it as my cue is just a playlist. So padding is annoying in this case.

I'm afraid CUETools is not fit for such case. Too many features of CUETools depend on input being a real CD image.
CUE sheet format itself is not prepared to handle such images. Track offsets in CUE sheet are stored in format mm:ss:ff, where ff is the number of frames.
There's no way to store fractional track length in CUE sheet.
Sorry to dissapoint you, but i'm not planning to support non-cd contents in CUE Tools.
CUETools 2.1.6

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #290 –
OK, so let's hope cuetools will support 24Bits one day so that I can fix both versions

Edit: My audio is shifted by 1 frame not by a 1 second. So it is 75 time less important than what I thought & due to this I begin to think that cuetools behaviour is the right way to handle this anyway ... so it's only a problem for my 24Bits version.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #291 –
Quote from: Gregory S. Chudov on
Quote from: Scidd0w on
But when I try to verify & encode to flac with embedded cuesheet I get the following application error and cuetools crashes:

Thanks. Does it only happen in 'Verify, then encode mode' and not in 'Encode and verify' mode? Do you have 'Fix offset if..' option turned on in advanced settings?
Yes, I just found out it does not happen when in 'Encode and verify'! And yes, I have ´fix offset if...´turned on.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #292 –
Then it has been fixed in 2.0.1
Offset correction didn't work with .m4a

Personaly i find 'fix offset if' more and more useless.
Rip can be verified without changing offset, so there's usually no point in it.
You only loose some samples for no particular gain.
Especially in automatic mode, when it's not really predictable.
I.e. in your case the rip is perfectly alright as it is,
it makes no sense to apply an offset to make it similar to a more popular pressing.
CUETools 2.1.6

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #293 –
Confirmed! Working with version 2.01.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #294 –
"fix offset if" doesn't make your rip any better but it gives you the "warm & fuzzy" felling of having the "best" rip possible, which secure ripping/accuraterip/lossless is all about. At least it can make your logs shorter ... personnaly I use "fix offset if" sometimes ... "fix offset if" is useless when you ripped the CD by yourself as you should be 100% that your pressing is official, you bought it, if you didn't rip it by yourself, it gives you the irrationnal feeling that you have a "more official pressing". This have nothing to do with audio quality, but I expect many many people will not agree if you remove it.

Edit: Typo

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #295 –
Quote from: sauvage78 on
"fix offset if" doesn't make your rip any better but it gives you the "warm & fuzzy" felling of having the "best" rip possible, which secure ripping/accuraterip/lossless is all about.
I mean no disrespect, but this is complete nonsense.

Quote from: Gregory S. Chudov on
Rip can be verified without changing offset, so there's usually no point in it.
I agree with you 100%

Quote from: Gregory S. Chudov on
You only loose some samples for no particular gain.
This is exactly correct.  These can easily be "real" (non-null) samples usually not covered by AR, which apparently give people "warmies and fuzzies" as well.

Quote from: Gregory S. Chudov on
Especially in automatic mode, when it's not really predictable.
Even more reason!

Quote from: Gregory S. Chudov on
I.e. in your case the rip is perfectly alright as it is, it makes no sense to apply an offset to make it similar to a more popular pressing.
Hopefully this will appeal to the non-conforming conformists, in case no other sensible advice does.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #296 –
greynol:
Did I said that it was making sense ? I said exactly the opposite: "irrationnal feeling". If fixing offset in cuetools doesn't make sense, it doesn't make much more sense to fix it in EAC in the first place, that's what I meant. Offsets have always been for paranoid people. Accuraterip only underlines it. (Edit: must be my typo on felling==>feeling)

Gregory:
After some comparisons with audacity, I deleted my non-padded NIN OEF releases, thks.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #297 –
I have a question, if the only thing that matters is the total number of accuraterip results no matter the offset, like you said here Answer 111 why doesn't you show a summary of it in front of the logs ? Even if it makes them longer, it would make logs much more readable, because actually sometime tracks 1to5 are accurate according to offset X & tracks 6to10 are accurate according to offset Y, which is not really understandable for newbies & even when you get used to it, it's boring to have to browse all the results just to be sure that all track matches with at least one result somewhere within the log, no matter the offset. The presentation by offset is good & usefull, but IMHO there should be a summary of the total matches by track in front of the actual presentation sorted by offset. I hope accuraterip 2 will help having each track to match a particular offset. But has long as accuraterip logs will be so tricky to understand, a summary will save a headache to a lot of people IMHO.
I had to read back the 12 pages of this thread+accuraterip forum in order to start to understand how to interpret results where tracks from the same rip matches different pressings.

Also the .accurip extension is not really friendly as the windows XP search function will not search within it (unlike .log & .txt) so personnaly I have batch renamed all my .accurip to .accurip.txt in order to search within them. I guess you want to make them different from EAC . log & from basic .txt that is sometimes used like a .nfo, so why don't you use a double extension .accurip.txt. like lossywav .lossy.flac, I mean ... I read it with notepad & I actually already change the extension in order to make them searchable, so I would rather have them directly using .accurip.txt. It doesn't matter much anyway I will use .accurip.txt, in fact I already does, but it would just make my life easier. I mean: if there were both a summary in front of log & the log were saved has .accurip.txt. I could make right-clic with my mouse/search inside my .accurip.txt for "all tracks were ripped accurately" or "some tracks weren't ripped accurately" (as exemple of summary sentences within the log), & instantly sort my collection between accurate & non-accurate rips. It would be very easy. Actually, I can't search the log as the extension is unfriendly & also because there is nothing to search as there is no summary. (Edit: I know you use vista, so maybe you will not unsderstand my point of view, the crappy search function in of vista was one of the reason why I never switched to vista despite trying it for several weeks, you cannot really understand me if you don't know what you miss ...)

I hope you understand what I mean as my english is obviously not perfect. For me, it is obvious that you under-estimate the usefullness of the right-clic/search function. Removing the drag & drop filename corrector is an hint of this. I could right-clic search for .cue drag & drop, it was instantly done. No headache if settings were good. This mockup Answer 46 was really what I wanted to see. Actually you can right-clic a folder full of EAC rips/search "There were errors" within .log & instantly find bad rips. I wish I could do the same as easyly with .accurip logs.

Last question, I noticed that "Partial match to pressing(s)" happens very often on the last track & my own ripping experience learned me that problem with scratches often happens on the last track too. Does it always means the rip is bad ? Is there any possibility that these rips could be good. I ask because I am gonna delete these rips to save some space. From my understanding of accuraterip these rips are inaccurate but I wonder if there could be some exception/special case that I could have forget. So I'd rather ask before I delete them. If you look at popular CD with lot of accurate results, the total is almost always lower on the last track.

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #298 –
There are situations where ripping a disc can result in an error of repeated samples that causes all subsequent tracks to be offset by a constant amount.  Disregarding offsets in a summary can give a false impression that all but one track was ok.

I like the idea of configuring the name of the summary file (and it's location as well).  I too append .txt to the end and move it out of the subfolder where it was created.  Perhaps some of this has already been done.  I haven't upgraded for a little while.  It's pretty damn hard to keep up with all this killer development.  ("killer" is a good thing for those who aren't from my generation and part of the world, BTW).

CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #299 –
Quote from: sauvage78 on
Removing the drag & drop filename corrector is an hint of this.


I'm going to a party, so i'll answer to other questions later.

Drag&drop has not been removed from filename corrector.
I haven't decided yet how to hint to it from the interface, but you can drop a bunch of files to the filesystem tree.
All the things that this program can do now have a unified interface - you select a single file, a folder for batch processing, or use drag'n'drop to select a bunch of files.
CUETools 2.1.6