Taperssection.com
Gear / Technical Help => Post-Processing, Computer / Streaming / Internet Devices & Related Activity => Topic started by: 6079 on September 05, 2007, 04:20:08 AM
-
I personally would prefer the tracks just state the name of the song and not all the date and venue info for each track as it seems to be with releases that have fingerprints or checksum (not terribly aware of the difference).
I don't expect you to explain it all, as I've read a few hours about it and still am only aware of it helping burn the CD faster or something like that. I just want to ask how important it is for the average person.
Also, I found out about more potential hassle, with sector boundaries. I use cooledit to edit the tracks, but apparently that doesn't work as well as "CD wave" for ensuring no SBE. Is this a big deal too?
Neither one sounds too difficult, I was just curious what the preference was of most tapers that seed their recordings.
-
I personally would prefer the tracks just state the name of the song and not all the date and venue info for each track as it seems to be with releases that have fingerprints or checksum (not terribly aware of the difference).
There is a "standard" for naming wav (but mostly flac) files, it's detailed here:
http://wiki.etree.org/index.php?page=NamingStandards
You'll find the majority of tapers follow this standard; however you'll see many variations on sites like Dime.
The text file that accompanies the torrented FLAC files should contain all the artist, track, equipment info (have a search on this too if you are unsure).
Also, I found out about more potential hassle, with sector boundaries. I use cooledit to edit the tracks, but apparently that doesn't work as well as "CD wave" for ensuring no SBE. Is this a big deal too?
Neither one sounds too difficult, I was just curious what the preference was of most tapers that seed their recordings.
Again, majority of us use CD Wave for seamless tracking of a 44.1 kHz recording.
Fingerprints and check sums are recommended, and obligatory for sites like Dime / bt.etree for seeding shows. Even if you're not intending to seed a recording now, it's worth doing the work now rather than in a couple of years.
Hope that answers your questions?
Humbug
-
Thanks.
Personally, I don't see the importance of it and I prefer having the files named by the song.
-
lol, w/o the proper naming of files, all hell is gonna break loose. How are you supposed to know what order to burn the tracks to a cd or dvd, and I hate it when there isnt uniformity for date labeling. mixing up the day and month is f'n lame. Also I always run md5, mostly just to make sure all the files are good to go and not corrupt.
-
this is humorous ;D, we should all just start naming them by song or however we want and see what happens. uniformity is a good thing when it comes to naming files.
-
Thanks.
Personally, I don't see the importance of it and I prefer having the files named by the song.
instead of using the song names in the file name, it'd be far better to use etree file naming standards, AND use FLAC metadata (aka FLAC tags) to get the info shown that you want to see when you play the files back via computer...
-
In addition to the standard naming scheme you can add meta data to your tracks that list title, etc. Those will show up on computer playback and most newer CD players. I think depending on what view you are in windows even shows you the data in explorer. MD5s are good so you know your download completed without error (but is a little pointless for torrents since bittorrent takes care of it for you.) FLAC fingerprints are just a good way to visually check a source to see if it differs from another without downloading it. Each FLAC track actually has error checking built in so you can 'test' the track without the fingerprint to make sure it is OK.
-
FFPs and MD5s: These insure that the files you DLed are "authentic". If the MD5 you have matches that of the original, you know you have perfect copies of the original. Also, with you are able to verify if your files have any errors.
ETREE naming standard: This has slowly become obsolete. I started a small discussion on the ETREE Forums about modifying the naming standard to combine the iPod standard of "01-song name, 02-song name" and the ETREE standard "bandnameYEAR-MO-DAd1t01, etc".
But after further thought, I decided that the old ETREE standard is perhaps still pertinent. If I DL a show that only has song names, and not track numbers, in the file-names, I am unable to figure the proper burning order. ETREE naming standard insures I know how to burn the tracks properly.
Also, when I copy over all my FLACs onto my HDD, they all line up in alphabetical and chronological order. This is really nice...
As for SBEs, you should make the attempt to correct these before you seed. If you do not, DLer #1 will "Fix" the SBEs one way, while DLer #2 will "Fix" the SBEs another way. You now have 2x different filesets - although they are from the same exact source, they may produce differing FFP/MD5s.
I tend to fix every fileset I DL so they match the shows that already exist in my archive. I keep track of the original FFP/MD5 - I copy them into the text file...
Terry
-
Additional uses for FFP/MD5s: Verify your files after you burn to data-disc. Sure you DLed without error, but did you burn the data for future use without error? I've found a few bad burns in my years of saving SHN/FLACs to disc...
Also, FLAC fingerprints should be used if at all possible. I don't personally use them, as I don't need them yet... But one day I'll be playing FLAC files > ??? > Stereo, so the tags will be nice.
The ETREE naming standard is useful for burning CDRs. Not so much for those of us that use PC based players or iPods, etc...
YMMV,
Terry
-
i make md5's for EVERY flac folder i ever burnt to disc/dvdr. I just started adding the song titles to the end of each track naming scheme. I like this method betterb than using a tagger.
heres an example and works great for listening from the PC:
aod2007-07-14.483.722_intro
aod2007-07-14.483.722_new_real_rhythm
aod2007-07-14.483.722_bootleggers_advice
it takes a bit longer but is worth the wait.
and ffp files have NEVER saved my ass until recently when i was batch-naming a whole show of files and I screwed up. i went back to the ffp file and could straighten them out and get them back in order thanks to the original ffp file I made.
simply put, JUST DO IT.
-
i make md5's for EVERY flac folder i ever burnt to disc/dvdr. I just started adding the song titles to the end of each track naming scheme. I like this method betterb than using a tagger.
heres an example and works great for listening from the PC:
aod2007-07-14.483.722_intro
aod2007-07-14.483.722_new_real_rhythm
aod2007-07-14.483.722_bootleggers_advice
it takes a bit longer but is worth the wait.
That's what I'd like to do.
Why not go with: BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01_Song_Name
instead of: BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01
This way you can select songs from a folder and know which is which.
-
By the way, if anybody's still reading this: Does anyone edit the file information with a Windows OS, where you right click the song and fill in the info fields? I can't tell where that would come in handy, other than when you were to also right click and check it out.
-
i make md5's for EVERY flac folder i ever burnt to disc/dvdr. I just started adding the song titles to the end of each track naming scheme. I like this method betterb than using a tagger.
heres an example and works great for listening from the PC:
aod2007-07-14.483.722_intro
aod2007-07-14.483.722_new_real_rhythm
aod2007-07-14.483.722_bootleggers_advice
it takes a bit longer but is worth the wait.
That's what I'd like to do.
Why not go with: BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01_Song_Name
instead of: BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01
This way you can select songs from a folder and know which is which.
thats exactly what I do except I include source info in the filename as well
banddate.sourceinfo_songname
works quite well for me :)
-
Thanks.
Personally, I don't see the importance of it and I prefer having the files named by the song.
instead of using the song names in the file name, it'd be far better to use etree file naming standards, AND use FLAC metadata (aka FLAC tags) to get the info shown that you want to see when you play the files back via computer...
AMEN to that.
I'm a newcomer to the tagging thing, just having gotten my first mp3 player I quickly became irritated with poorly tagged file sets. Tagging the files is the only way to go.
-
Thanks.
Personally, I don't see the importance of it and I prefer having the files named by the song.
instead of using the song names in the file name, it'd be far better to use etree file naming standards, AND use FLAC metadata (aka FLAC tags) to get the info shown that you want to see when you play the files back via computer...
AMEN to that.
I'm a newcomer to the tagging thing, just having gotten my first mp3 player I quickly became irritated with poorly tagged file sets. Tagging the files is the only way to go.
maybe we can get cfox to tag them fully this next go around... nice ptown tapes btw!
-
i make md5's for EVERY flac folder i ever burnt to disc/dvdr. I just started adding the song titles to the end of each track naming scheme. I like this method betterb than using a tagger.
heres an example and works great for listening from the PC:
aod2007-07-14.483.722_intro
aod2007-07-14.483.722_new_real_rhythm
aod2007-07-14.483.722_bootleggers_advice
it takes a bit longer but is worth the wait.
That's what I'd like to do.
Why not go with: BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01_Song_Name
instead of: BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01
This way you can select songs from a folder and know which is which.
thats exactly what I do except I include source info in the filename as well
banddate.sourceinfo_songname
works quite well for me :)
Bean...man YOU DON'T name your files like that because they won't sort properly the way you have them above. Fortunately, I know that in your REAL uploads, you also insert the disc and track number AHEAD of the song name so that they will sort right. I know you do this because I know how you name your tracks!!!
Obviously, without the disc and track number, your files woouldn't sort properly!
-
i make md5's for EVERY flac folder i ever burnt to disc/dvdr. I just started adding the song titles to the end of each track naming scheme. I like this method betterb than using a tagger.
heres an example and works great for listening from the PC:
aod2007-07-14.483.722_intro
aod2007-07-14.483.722_new_real_rhythm
aod2007-07-14.483.722_bootleggers_advice
it takes a bit longer but is worth the wait.
That's what I'd like to do.
Why not go with: BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01_Song_Name
instead of: BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01
This way you can select songs from a folder and know which is which.
What's fairly funny about your suggestion is that you prove in this thread that you didn't even READ the etree naming conventions because if you had, you'd understand why all of your suggestions, including the suggestion above, are inappropriate.
Now you're trying to recommend to an entire nation of people how better to do it, which is also rather funny because your above suggestion again was NOT thought through with any degree of diligence, or else you'd AGAIN understand why the above suggested convetion is not complete. BTW, what you're TRYING to communicate indeed IS discussed in the etree naming conventions anyways.
-
Well, in my example the track name precedes the song name, therefore the files would sort properly, as in line up from 01 to 09, etc.
The fingerprint txt. file will be off center because of different names, but I'm unaware of what any negative effect of this would be, other than, modifying standard e-tree naming standards. That's why I asked.
-
Well, in my example the track name precedes the song name, therefore the files would sort properly, as in line up from 01 to 09, etc.
The fingerprint txt. file will be off center because of different names, but I'm unaware of what any negative effect of this would be, other than, modifying standard e-tree naming standards. That's why I asked.
It doesn't work for multi-disc schows. The sort order would be:
BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01_ASongOneOnDiscTwo.flac
BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01_SongOneOnDiscOne.flac
...
We live in a free world. You can name the files whatever you want. But keep in mind that there is a reason why most other tapers do it the standard way. Your naming scheme probably works well on your Windows PC, but there's still some folks with file names limited to a smaller amount of characters or even different character sets. The standard was designed for maximum compatibility.
-
The standard was designed for maximum compatibility.
Exactly! Not only that, but I'm sure that it was desiged with a significant amount of thought and input behind it before the final conventions were agreed to by many many people on etree.
6079, if you like the standard where you include the song title, go ahead and do that, but you really should consider staying consistent with already established standards.
For those of us that don't use the song title in our naming conventions, we have the setlist in the text file (which is a required input anyway) to determine which song is which.
-
i make md5's for EVERY flac folder i ever burnt to disc/dvdr. I just started adding the song titles to the end of each track naming scheme. I like this method betterb than using a tagger.
heres an example and works great for listening from the PC:
aod2007-07-14.483.722_intro
aod2007-07-14.483.722_new_real_rhythm
aod2007-07-14.483.722_bootleggers_advice
it takes a bit longer but is worth the wait.
That's what I'd like to do.
Why not go with: BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01_Song_Name
instead of: BandName_YYYY-MM-DD_01
This way you can select songs from a folder and know which is which.
gd1973-02-09d1t01bertha.flac
This way is a possible option on etree. Your files will stay in order and the title is there for you.