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 1565064 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2975 –
cuetools 2.16 prerequisites lists net framework 2.0sp2 & vcrun2008.

today i created a fresh 64bit wineprefix, installed only dotnet20sp2 (x64) and to my surprise, cuetools (libflac) was working just fine.

in the changelog of cuetools you find:

I moved from Visual Studio 2005 to Visual Studio 2008, sorry folks, you might need to install yet another MS redistributable (most likely it's already installed): x86 version, x64 version. If you don't see libFLAC in the list of flac encoders, that means you need this redistributable. Although you can just use libFlake instead, which doesn't require it.

is vcrun2008 needed at all?

p.s. it even works with dotnet20sp1 alone - is wine transcendent or what?  8)

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2976 –
a quick question: i would like to update (overwrite) the codecs from cuetools 2016 with the ones from 2017, will this work?

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2977 –
Quote from: sanskrit44 on
a quick question: i would like to update (overwrite) the codecs from cuetools 2016 with the ones from 2017, will this work?
Sorry, no. Also settings are incompatible, so it's best to either remove user_profiles_enabled file to keep settings with the program.
CUETools 2.1.6

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2978 –
ok, i see, thanks.

i would like to stick with 2016 stable, any chance to make use of the latest flac version avaiable, then?

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2979 –
No. But there's really no point. At this point in flac development, there aren't many improvements to be had.
CUETools 2.1.6

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2980 –
have you ever considered making cuetools more modular by using codec.exes that can be exchanged more easily? i guess there is good reasons how things are working out right now, but i believe a modular concept has its claim.

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2981 –
First of all, it is. You can actually configure it to use an external command line encoder if you wish to do so.
I wouldn't recommend it. As i said, flac is very stable and there's really no point in updating it.
Personally i use cuetools built in encoder, because it provides better compression than official encoder.
If i didn't have that, i'd use builtin libFLAC version, because it's stable and using a .dll is faster and safer in some ways than using an external command line encoder.
But if for some reason i fail to grasp those two options don't appeal to you, go ahead and configure an external command line encoder.
CUETools 2.1.6

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2982 –
hey, no worries - it was more or less a kind of remembrance of the good old burrrn days :)

i loved the tool for its modularity, a very clean and simply way to update codecs (if you feel the need for).

i can live with an older flac version, but i would have upgraded if it is just a matter of copying over a file...

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2983 –
Quote from: sanskrit44 on
i can live with an older flac version, but i would have upgraded if it is just a matter of copying over a file...

Same here. I'm still trying out CUETools and using 2.1.6 but am looking forward to 2.1.7 with updated FLAC.

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2984 –
hi
will there be support for musepack?

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2985 –
i just tested cuetools 2.17 on a 64bit wineprefix (dotnet40 + vcrun2015 installed). when running libflac as encoder, i get the following warning:

exception: arithmetic operation resulted in an overflow

btw - cuetools encoder works, but it is very slow (50x) in comparison to libflac (170x on 2.16). is this the normal case (always used libflac)?

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2986 –
Quote from: Ozz on
will there be support for musepack?
It's probably possible to configure CUETools to use a command line musepack encoder.

Quote from: sanskrit44 on
i just tested cuetools 2.17 on a 64bit wineprefix (dotnet40 + vcrun2015 installed).
I'm afraid i never tested cuetools with Wine. Was cuetools encoder as slow in 2.1.6? Also, what compression levels are we talking about in both cases, because cuetools -5 often compresses as good as libFLAC -7.
CUETools 2.1.6

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2987 –
Quote from: sanskrit44 on
btw - cuetools encoder works, but it is very slow (50x) in comparison to libflac (170x on 2.16). is this the normal case (always used libflac)?
You have to realize that CUETools flake compresses as least as good as the generic flac encoder using the additional parameters e and p. The speed is great for its compression rate then. It is ~150x on a slightly OC'd 8700k at -8 btw.
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2988 –
Quote from: Gregory S. Chudov on
I'm afraid i never tested cuetools with Wine. Was cuetools encoder as slow in 2.1.6? Also, what compression levels are we talking about in both cases, because cuetools -5 often compresses as good as libFLAC -7.
no prob, just wanted to let you know there is problems with wine and ct 2.17.

regarding cuetools encoder, i left all to default values (-5). in 2.16, the speed is pretty much identical.

@wombat: thanks for clarifying. which level to choose then with cuetools, if i am looking for libflac -6 (cuetools -4)?

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2989 –
Sorry, i don't have numbers for inbetween levels. I always used and therefore compared high compression settings.
Is troll-adiposity coming from feederism?
With 24bit music you can listen to silence much louder!

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2990 –
Quote from: Wombat on
Sorry, i don't have numbers for inbetween levels. I always used and therefore compared high compression settings.
well, i tried with cuetools -4 so to be on par with libflac -6, but it did not get that much better. now it is 58x (2.16 & 2.17) vs 170x (2.16).

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2991 –
Thanks. Well, i'll blame Wine. It's a lot faster without it. Have you tried Mono?
CUETools 2.1.6

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2992 –
Quote from: Gregory S. Chudov on
Thanks. Well, i'll blame Wine. It's a lot faster without it. Have you tried Mono?
no, i have not, but i'd be interrested to know as well. unfortunately, with mono, some tools refuse to work properly and you can not have both (dotnet + mono) in parallel.

in the end, it is just my wineprefix - ha! anyone on linux with the same results?

what is the speed of cuetools vs libflac on your win machine?

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2993 –
Quick unscientific test on one small file:
Code: [Select]
Size       mode            speed
25,144,135 cuetools-8.flac 83.21x; 
25,149,808 cuetools-7.flac 110.74x
25,153,336 cuetools-6.flac 122.28x
25,161,336 cuetools-5.flac 152.34x
25,172,183 cuetools-4.flac 172.86x
25,171,795 libFLAC-8.flac  161.39x
25,182,825 libFLAC-7.flac  222.90x
CUETools 2.1.6

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2994 –
thank you.

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2996 –
Oh right, sorry. Forgot i never got around to adding a button to register a new extension.
CUETools 2.1.6

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2997 –
Quote from: Corwin on
Wow, I've been running CUETools 2.1.5 in kvm (Linux VM) with XP for years. Running CUETools 2.1.6 under wine 3.0 on the same system is 7.5x faster (6 seconds vs 45 seconds) for a verify on the same album. Fortunately I did not encounter any crashes using wine, all the config screens worked fine. The font size is microscopically small on my 4K monitor though.
I'm seeing the same with Windows 10.  It appears that CUETools 2.1.6 does not follow DPI scaling I set.  Does anyone have any solutions?

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2998 –
Is CUETools having issues querying recently added albums from ctdb?

http://db.cuetools.net/?tocid=xlmbOkBcwfHM2CvMl990tuhd5TY-

When running verify:
Code: [Select]
[CUETools log; Date: 5/5/2018 6:38:02 PM; Version: 2.1.6]
[AccurateRip ID: 001681b5-00d1bdf6-960bb00c] disk not present in database.

Track Peak [ CRC32  ] [W/O NULL] [  LOG   ]
 --   99.8 [436F1A4D] [2933A9F6]           
 01   99.8 [F4F2AA2F] [5D9DCF21]   CRC32   
 02   99.8 [7044355F] [3E8D5529]   CRC32   
 03   99.8 [ECF0A1A8] [907B2025]   CRC32   
 04   99.8 [517F682D] [D8EBD158]   CRC32   
 05   99.8 [22D45D61] [4530D008]   CRC32   
 06   99.8 [3A3ED517] [0C7663F0]   CRC32   
 07   99.8 [598B0B27] [CDEDA38A]   CRC32   
 08   99.8 [4D7EE73F] [CA9905E1]   CRC32   
 09   99.8 [BED8E745] [4E9C0D9A]   CRC32   
 10   99.8 [3C97D910] [8E80C50D]   CRC32   
 11   99.8 [12BC2E1E] [EAC74562]   CRC32   
 12   99.8 [C1DDBF90] [D3D7D3D9]   CRC32

An older album verified just fine.

Re: CUETools versions 1.9.5 through 2.1.5 (current)

Reply #2999 –
No, it looks like it didn't even try to query the database. You might have turned it off by mistake. It's the checkbox next to the icon of a CD with a red plus on it.
CUETools 2.1.6
 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2021