For this purpose use the link I provided above (http://www.vuplayer.com/files/audiotester.zip) - it checks whether the audio stream is correct. In case it is correct after fixing using our tool, you can be sure that the files are ok and you don't need to rerip.
Jiri
Corrupted FLAC files after tag edit
Moderator: Gurus
So...
So you're saying that, say I tagged a FLAC file 10 times with 2.5.5.996, and 10 blocks of audio data were removed.jiri wrote:For this purpose use the link I provided above (http://www.vuplayer.com/files/audiotester.zip) - it checks whether the audio stream is correct. In case it is correct after fixing using our tool, you can be sure that the files are ok and you don't need to rerip.
Jiri
Then I re-encoded FLAC->FLAC with 2.5.5.998.
In that case, audiotester would say there were problems with the file? That can't be the case, because I have tagged some FLAC files several times with 2.5.5.996, then reencoded with .998, and audiotester reports no problems with them. Yet you have said that 2.5.5.996 DOES remove audio data on repeated FLAC tagging. Which would mean, to me, that audiotester is only checking for *current* file internal consistency, not for what may have been lost through previous corruption under 2.5.5.996
If I am wrong about this, please let me know, and tell me what audiotester is actually doing to check for audio data that may have been lost (as in 2.5.5.996), and what checksum it's using to discover this problem.
If I'm right, let me know that too.
- Tim
Can anyone actually HEAR any problems with these affected audio files? I know I haven't.
While I understand the desire for 'lossless' to stay 'lossless', I think its pointless to worry about if the files play and you can't hear any difference.
But thats just me.
While I understand the desire for 'lossless' to stay 'lossless', I think its pointless to worry about if the files play and you can't hear any difference.
But thats just me.
New script: 
Last.FM Node Now with DJ Mode!
Last.fm + MediaMonkey = Scrobbler DJ!
Tag with MusicBrainz ~ Get Album Art!
Tweak the Monkey! ~ My Scripts Page
Last.FM Node Now with DJ Mode!Last.fm + MediaMonkey = Scrobbler DJ!
Tag with MusicBrainz ~ Get Album Art!
Tweak the Monkey! ~ My Scripts Page
I know we're all being a bit anal about this; but if you want to eventually get rid of your CD collection and just keep the FLAC files, you want them (well, *I* want them) to be 100% accurate copies, or as close as that can be.Teknojnky wrote:Can anyone actually HEAR any problems with these affected audio files? I know I haven't.
While I understand the desire for 'lossless' to stay 'lossless', I think its pointless to worry about if the files play and you can't hear any difference.
But thats just me.
Others have said it *does* make a noticable difference during gapless playback - if track 1 and track 2 play back on the CD without any noticable gap, and then you are missing some samples at the beginning of a file, you'll hear a "pop" or a "click" between tracks, which I don't want.
- Tim
TBessie:
I am faced with more or less the same questions you have outlined. In my case I still haven't re-encoded my collection (so I still have the damaged versions of all my FLAC files). Having said that, I KNOW for a fact that many (if not all) of these files were tagged and retagged over the last 6 months. I want to know the same thing as you. Does the FLAC header have a checksum in it which could be recalculated as part of the fix utility to determine if any of the frames at the start of the track were overwritten. I REALLY want to know this so I can determine how many of these files have been damaged in a way that would make me want to re-rip from the original CD. For me, re-ripping is a huge effort and time commitment given the size of my library.
Re-tagging after the ripping is also a tremendous effort and that is why I like your idea of being able to export/import tag data so that when/if I need to re-rip I can easily import all of my custom tag data. To be honest, the primary reason I purchased Media Monkey was for the all of the advanced tagging features which I have used extensively in the past and THAT is where most of my time has been spent using the tool.
As a side note, I like to use EAC to rip my CDs. I typically go for speed, ripping 3 cd's at once on a single PC and ripping directly to .wav files (low cpu and fast). Then, I like to do a batch conversion from .wav to .flac using DBPOWERAMP (runs overnight) and then re-tagging with MediaMonkey as the final step. Of course, those .wav files are all deleted after conversion. One idea I am now toying with is the possiblity of ripping to .iso images (which I would maintain with off-line storage) and then converting those .iso images to .flac files which would be maintained online. FYI - I run an HTPC (FLAC support), a D-LINK DSM-520 (FLAC support through TVERSITY on my server) and PHATBOX (FLAC support) in my car.
I haven't been able to listen to my music for a loooong time due to these issues and I still don't really feel comfortable with running the fix utility and not knowing which files were truly damaged where music data was lost versus which were not.
I am reaching the point where I may have to "bite the bullet" and just re-rip everything . . . Something I don't want to do but may not have a choice.
Andrew
I am faced with more or less the same questions you have outlined. In my case I still haven't re-encoded my collection (so I still have the damaged versions of all my FLAC files). Having said that, I KNOW for a fact that many (if not all) of these files were tagged and retagged over the last 6 months. I want to know the same thing as you. Does the FLAC header have a checksum in it which could be recalculated as part of the fix utility to determine if any of the frames at the start of the track were overwritten. I REALLY want to know this so I can determine how many of these files have been damaged in a way that would make me want to re-rip from the original CD. For me, re-ripping is a huge effort and time commitment given the size of my library.
Re-tagging after the ripping is also a tremendous effort and that is why I like your idea of being able to export/import tag data so that when/if I need to re-rip I can easily import all of my custom tag data. To be honest, the primary reason I purchased Media Monkey was for the all of the advanced tagging features which I have used extensively in the past and THAT is where most of my time has been spent using the tool.
As a side note, I like to use EAC to rip my CDs. I typically go for speed, ripping 3 cd's at once on a single PC and ripping directly to .wav files (low cpu and fast). Then, I like to do a batch conversion from .wav to .flac using DBPOWERAMP (runs overnight) and then re-tagging with MediaMonkey as the final step. Of course, those .wav files are all deleted after conversion. One idea I am now toying with is the possiblity of ripping to .iso images (which I would maintain with off-line storage) and then converting those .iso images to .flac files which would be maintained online. FYI - I run an HTPC (FLAC support), a D-LINK DSM-520 (FLAC support through TVERSITY on my server) and PHATBOX (FLAC support) in my car.
I haven't been able to listen to my music for a loooong time due to these issues and I still don't really feel comfortable with running the fix utility and not knowing which files were truly damaged where music data was lost versus which were not.
I am reaching the point where I may have to "bite the bullet" and just re-rip everything . . . Something I don't want to do but may not have a choice.
Andrew
Teknojnky:
I think for those of us who opt to leverage lossless formats (like flac) it DOES make a difference. I consider myself an audiophile and I want my lossless collection to be an accurate copy of my CDs. I don't want my music data to be corrupted, modified or damaged in any way. I keep my collection on a RAID5 array precisely so that I don't lose that data. For me, a situation like the one we are now facing fundamentally undermines the value of using a lossless file format. On the other hand, if I were using a lossy format such as .mp3 or .wma, then I would agree with you - what difference does it really make if a few bits are missing here or there? After all, the .mp3 is already missing lots of bits all over the place! In the case of the lossless format, this logic does not apply. Fundamentally, we are talking about two different strategies based upon widely disparate of goals . . . You may not agree, but I hope you can at least understand my perspective.
I think for those of us who opt to leverage lossless formats (like flac) it DOES make a difference. I consider myself an audiophile and I want my lossless collection to be an accurate copy of my CDs. I don't want my music data to be corrupted, modified or damaged in any way. I keep my collection on a RAID5 array precisely so that I don't lose that data. For me, a situation like the one we are now facing fundamentally undermines the value of using a lossless file format. On the other hand, if I were using a lossy format such as .mp3 or .wma, then I would agree with you - what difference does it really make if a few bits are missing here or there? After all, the .mp3 is already missing lots of bits all over the place! In the case of the lossless format, this logic does not apply. Fundamentally, we are talking about two different strategies based upon widely disparate of goals . . . You may not agree, but I hope you can at least understand my perspective.
I do understand because I've moved to lossless myself and I abhor the thought of having damaged/corrupted files.
But, no matter how much I agree to the sentiment of lossless data, is now no longer lossless, that the effort of re-ripping everything, when there is no audible change, is simply not a reasonable choice.
In other words, I've decided to live with it. At least until I come across a file which I can hear a click/pop/noise/something that will be sufficient evidence to re-rip that particular disc.
Lesser of two evils I suppose.
Was this an unfortunate event, sure it was, especially due to the lossless format. Will it break my audio? Not so far that I've been able to tell. I've long since re-coded flac to flac (via MM) any of my affected files. I could not even say which files were affected any more, and I don't keep track of ones I've ripped since.
Like I said, I understand the sore spot, I've just accepted to live with it.
But, no matter how much I agree to the sentiment of lossless data, is now no longer lossless, that the effort of re-ripping everything, when there is no audible change, is simply not a reasonable choice.
In other words, I've decided to live with it. At least until I come across a file which I can hear a click/pop/noise/something that will be sufficient evidence to re-rip that particular disc.
Lesser of two evils I suppose.
Was this an unfortunate event, sure it was, especially due to the lossless format. Will it break my audio? Not so far that I've been able to tell. I've long since re-coded flac to flac (via MM) any of my affected files. I could not even say which files were affected any more, and I don't keep track of ones I've ripped since.
Like I said, I understand the sore spot, I've just accepted to live with it.
New script: Last.FM Node Now with DJ Mode!
Last.fm + MediaMonkey = Scrobbler DJ!
Tag with MusicBrainz ~ Get Album Art!
Tweak the Monkey! ~ My Scripts Page
Last.FM Node Now with DJ Mode!Last.fm + MediaMonkey = Scrobbler DJ!
Tag with MusicBrainz ~ Get Album Art!
Tweak the Monkey! ~ My Scripts Page
To respond that question about AudioTester: It can only check for errors in audio stream, it can't find out whether the stream is complete or not. I.e. it won't tell you whether tracks that were created from the damaged ones are complete or not. 
Jiri
P.S.: And also it isn't possible to test this, CRC in FLAC is stored per frame, not per whole file.
Jiri
P.S.: And also it isn't possible to test this, CRC in FLAC is stored per frame, not per whole file.
If We are in terms of talking about Lossless in Audiophile words. I personally when rip track remove all silence on track beginning/end to ensure that when I play that track on either Radio or on DJ Stage I know that I can make Bit To Bit MIX without fearing of silence at the begining. In addition Each song I have played have several Addition info for me to be used when I DJ (Bit2Bit Start Cue point and FadeIn length for start of track, Bit2Bit Mix out Cue point and FadeOut Length for track end) that involves all Types of formats not just FLAC. I Collect music for me only and as I own Original CD/LP and do not Copy my tracks to anyone until the tracks stop serve the purpose I do not worry about loosing few Milliseconds of unnoticeable loss if happened, but from other hand the people who need to recreate exact Copy Of CD only valid was is to create exact ISO Copy not ripped files due to lots of Sub channels loss in Ripping Process. Which means That even Audio is Lossless you will be still lost Audio Sub channel data which then classify that file Lossy in its true means of lossless. Pop, cracks and other artifacts are not tolerated with me too and I re-rip each track with it.
Best regards,
Peke
MediaMonkey Team lead QA/Tech Support guru
Admin of Free MediaMonkey addon Site HappyMonkeying
How to attach PICTURE/SCREENSHOTS to forum posts
Peke
MediaMonkey Team lead QA/Tech Support guru
Admin of Free MediaMonkey addon Site HappyMonkeying
How to attach PICTURE/SCREENSHOTS to forum posts
-
Guest
Just thought I would post some of my results using the repair utility so that other people going through the same process might know what to expect. Of 12,499 flac files, 8221 showed as "corrupted" when check using the script available in this thread. I then "fixed" those files. Using the "audiotester" utility I tested all 12, 499 files for corruption and discovered that I had an additional 1622 files which were still damaged but reporting as "fixed" and error free when re-tested using the MM repair script. For these files, I am manually selecting and re-encoding. For most files this process appears to be working although I did have some files which apparently can not be repaired . . .
Andrew
Andrew
-
Guest
Explain to us dummies
Could someone explain in simple terms who should be worried about corruption?
I downloaded MM some week ago and upgraded to Gold a couple of days later. I have gone through my collection of 28 GB Flacs (1.1.4) collection using MM v 2.5.5.998. Am I home free then?
I downloaded MM some week ago and upgraded to Gold a couple of days later. I have gone through my collection of 28 GB Flacs (1.1.4) collection using MM v 2.5.5.998. Am I home free then?
-
Guest
I'm not sure how that could be, if you were using .998 to do your tagging. There are a few settings that help with gapless playback... search around here or ask, and folks'll point you to them.Anonymous wrote:I can hear a difference, this means a total re-rip of hundreds of gigs for me, nothing reports as corrupted with either tool, but there are obviously missing frames.
No point reripping if you don't have to - how are you testing for missing frames?
- Tim