Corrupted FLAC files after tag edit
Moderator: Gurus
Missing Frames
How do you identify a missing frame? Unless you can hear the start of the file is truncated - which isn't likely, since many/most tracks begin with a second or more of silence - the only way to reliably tell would be to re-rip the track and compare the length of the re-ripped file to the one you currently have in MediaMonkey.
I ran the Audio Tester program against my library, and while it found lots of errors on my old MP3 files, I only saw a few FLAC tracks listed, with the following error code: (MD5_MISMATCH)
What's an MD5 mismatch, and how do I fix it?
I ran the Audio Tester program against my library, and while it found lots of errors on my old MP3 files, I only saw a few FLAC tracks listed, with the following error code: (MD5_MISMATCH)
What's an MD5 mismatch, and how do I fix it?
I have rencoded FLAC > FLAC as suggested. However, I had tagged lots of music with an effected version. You are correct it is only noticeable in albums that play continuously(I noticed in Pink Flod The Wall for example). If an album has padding, there is no issue. However, this is not acceptable to me as they are no longer duplicates of the original.
any edit as far as I understand.
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 just checked my FLAC collection of over 8000 songs. More than 2000 of them were corrupted! I'll need to spend a month or two ripping and tagging all the songs again. I am NOT impressed.
It goes beyond me why the developers have not posted a notice on the MediaMonkey home page highlighting this problem and requesting that people upgrade urgently. Many users are busy corrupting their FLAC collections on a daily basis without being aware of it. Had they posted a notice my own damage would have been much less. Why have they not sent out an email to all Gold and Lifetime licence holders? I'm a lifetime licence holder and would really have appreciated such a notice!
PLEASE GUYS, WAKE UP AND PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE AND MORE IRATE USERS BY MAKING THIS PROBLEM VISIBLE ON YOUR WEB SITE AND THROUGH EMAIL!!!
It goes beyond me why the developers have not posted a notice on the MediaMonkey home page highlighting this problem and requesting that people upgrade urgently. Many users are busy corrupting their FLAC collections on a daily basis without being aware of it. Had they posted a notice my own damage would have been much less. Why have they not sent out an email to all Gold and Lifetime licence holders? I'm a lifetime licence holder and would really have appreciated such a notice!
PLEASE GUYS, WAKE UP AND PREVENT FURTHER DAMAGE AND MORE IRATE USERS BY MAKING THIS PROBLEM VISIBLE ON YOUR WEB SITE AND THROUGH EMAIL!!!
I only saw the thread "Re - flac corruption - can we expect a sync tool?" now (see http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=17871).
Since we have to re-rip all our corrupted FLAC files as a result of this serious bug in MM, the least the developers could do is to provide us with a tool to support this process.
I've spent a huge amount of time to tag all the songs in my collection. Many of the songs required long searches on the internet to find the correct year of release and other tag info. I just cannot imagine doing that again for the over 2000 corrupted songs in my collection.
Developers of MM, please provide us with a tool to support the long and unpleasant process of re-ripping our corrupted files without having to manually enter all the tag information again. That would show a large amount of good will from you.
Since we have to re-rip all our corrupted FLAC files as a result of this serious bug in MM, the least the developers could do is to provide us with a tool to support this process.
I've spent a huge amount of time to tag all the songs in my collection. Many of the songs required long searches on the internet to find the correct year of release and other tag info. I just cannot imagine doing that again for the over 2000 corrupted songs in my collection.
Developers of MM, please provide us with a tool to support the long and unpleasant process of re-ripping our corrupted files without having to manually enter all the tag information again. That would show a large amount of good will from you.
I am totally amazed by the total lack of response or feedback from the developers of MM over this serious problem. Developers, I do understand that these things happen and that the damage to the corrupted FLAC files are irreversible. These things do happen. However, it cannot be just silently ignored with the hope that it will go away.
The fact of the matter is that many of the users of MM will have to invest significant time and effort into re-ripping their corrupted FLAC files. One thing I can mention is that most of them rip their FLAC files with EAC since we want to make sure that it's a bit-perfect copy. I know many of you feel that the few frames of audio lost at the beginning of the corrupted tracks are not audible. That is certainly not the case with my collection since most of my CD's are continuous mixes with one track flowing into the next without silence. As a result the missing frames result in an audible and very distracting pop during the transition from one to the next track.
So, we would really appreciate a tool that will make our lives easier for going through this arduous and time-consuming process again.
As mentioned before, I've spent many months tagging my files with all the information I need, many of it found only after long searches on the internet. Therefore, I would really like a tool that allows us to transfer all this information from the corrupted files to the re-ripped files in an easy way.
PLEASE, let us know what your plans are, even if you decide NOT to do anything about it. ANY communication is better than NO communication!
The fact of the matter is that many of the users of MM will have to invest significant time and effort into re-ripping their corrupted FLAC files. One thing I can mention is that most of them rip their FLAC files with EAC since we want to make sure that it's a bit-perfect copy. I know many of you feel that the few frames of audio lost at the beginning of the corrupted tracks are not audible. That is certainly not the case with my collection since most of my CD's are continuous mixes with one track flowing into the next without silence. As a result the missing frames result in an audible and very distracting pop during the transition from one to the next track.
So, we would really appreciate a tool that will make our lives easier for going through this arduous and time-consuming process again.
As mentioned before, I've spent many months tagging my files with all the information I need, many of it found only after long searches on the internet. Therefore, I would really like a tool that allows us to transfer all this information from the corrupted files to the re-ripped files in an easy way.
PLEASE, let us know what your plans are, even if you decide NOT to do anything about it. ANY communication is better than NO communication!
--- snippage ... ---jaco wrote:I am totally amazed by the total lack of response or feedback from the developers of MM over this serious problem.
I agree that I'd like to see something back from the developers on this. They're hard at work on MM 3, of course, and there's that "personal issue" one of the developers mentioned, so I won't jump on them yet about it. I'd expect they'll develop something AFTER they're done with the final release of MM3 and have the time to do it.
We should definitely keep reminding them, and trying to get people on our side to encourage them, so that they know it's something that's wanted, but it might be a bit early to expect something from them.
I know you said you'd just like to hear SOMETHING. I would, also... whether it's on their list of things to do or not, at least.
- Tim
flac corruption in MM 2.5.5.996
Hi,
I apologise for the belated response.
This is due primarily to the fact that it was my impression was that the issue was mostly solved via the flacfix tool posted by Jiri, and that only a few users were affected it. Also, we're working hard on the 3.0 release, and I've been somewhat out of the loop due to 'personal' issues tbessie alluded to earlier.
Enough with the excuses. Most importantly we want to make this right. I'm going to:
a) send an update notification so that all pre 2.5.5.998 users are told to upgrade to MM 2.5.5.998 (done--but see note below).
b) update the announcement on the home page re. 2.5.5.998 to describe the problem (done)
c) post a note to our support page containing a description of the issue along with the flac fix tool and post the same note to our forum and make it sticky (done).
For the future, we also plan to:
d) create a script/tool that would allow users to rip tracks to replace existing (corrupted) entries (hopefully for 3.0)
e) add flac 'paranoia' setting (not sure if this will be in 3.0)
f) create a tool to better automate tagging (we have prototype code, but this will probably be post 3.0). Note that 3.0 gives scriptwriters more control in this regard already.
I wish we had a fully automated solution to resolve this for you NOW, but I hope this at least clarifies the situation.
-Rusty
edit: updated status. Note, though that due to the design of the update notification system, only users of MM 2.5.4 are automatically notified of the upgrade
I apologise for the belated response.
This is due primarily to the fact that it was my impression was that the issue was mostly solved via the flacfix tool posted by Jiri, and that only a few users were affected it. Also, we're working hard on the 3.0 release, and I've been somewhat out of the loop due to 'personal' issues tbessie alluded to earlier.
Enough with the excuses. Most importantly we want to make this right. I'm going to:
a) send an update notification so that all pre 2.5.5.998 users are told to upgrade to MM 2.5.5.998 (done--but see note below).
b) update the announcement on the home page re. 2.5.5.998 to describe the problem (done)
c) post a note to our support page containing a description of the issue along with the flac fix tool and post the same note to our forum and make it sticky (done).
For the future, we also plan to:
d) create a script/tool that would allow users to rip tracks to replace existing (corrupted) entries (hopefully for 3.0)
e) add flac 'paranoia' setting (not sure if this will be in 3.0)
f) create a tool to better automate tagging (we have prototype code, but this will probably be post 3.0). Note that 3.0 gives scriptwriters more control in this regard already.
I wish we had a fully automated solution to resolve this for you NOW, but I hope this at least clarifies the situation.
-Rusty
edit: updated status. Note, though that due to the design of the update notification system, only users of MM 2.5.4 are automatically notified of the upgrade
Last edited by rusty on Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Hello Rusty,
Thank you for your reply and the actions that you've already taken on this issue - that is how things should be done and you've set a great example!
Regarding your point d) I would like to bring to your attention that most people who rip their files to flac are not using MM to do that - they use another application called Exact Audio Copy (EAC). So, if you provide a tool for this please make it such that it can work with files ripped by external tools.
Could you maybe explain what the flac 'paranoia' setting will do?
Regards
Jaco
Thank you for your reply and the actions that you've already taken on this issue - that is how things should be done and you've set a great example!
Regarding your point d) I would like to bring to your attention that most people who rip their files to flac are not using MM to do that - they use another application called Exact Audio Copy (EAC). So, if you provide a tool for this please make it such that it can work with files ripped by external tools.
Could you maybe explain what the flac 'paranoia' setting will do?
Regards
Jaco
My suggestions...
Ditto!jaco wrote:Hello Rusty,
Thank you for your reply and the actions that you've already taken on this issue - that is how things should be done and you've set a great example!
Yes, that's something I to wanted clarify as well. I won't be ripping via Media Monkey, but with EAC, so I will have a large hierarchy of re-ripped files who's tags are probably vaguely similar to some of those in my MM library; they will likely be divided up into folders by album.Regarding your point d) I would like to bring to your attention that most people who rip their files to flac are not using MM to do that - they use another application called Exact Audio Copy (EAC). So, if you provide a tool for this please make it such that it can work with files ripped by external tools.
What I want to do, even if it's not a fully-automated solution, would be to have a "sync tool" as I'd mentioned, where, for example, you'd have the screen divided into left/right panes, each of which contained a "file" list. The left would be entries in the MediaMonkey database (its idea of the library), and the right would be files in the filesystem (these re-ripped files). Both panes could be filtered by node, search, etc. as usual, and also sortable by column headings, as usual.
I could manually align files by either drag/drop separately within each pane (multiple drag/drop would be convenient) or via the sorting headers.
That way, I could very quickly associate a group of database entries with the files I wanted to apply their tags to, say "GO!" and then go make a sandwich while MM applied the tags in the database to the files I'd associated them with.
This procedure could either permanently associate them with those database records (kind of like 'find missing files' does now, except with more control by the user), or simply just tag the files, leaving association/reassociation as a separate MM procedure.
Having a couple of options to select which of the above would be done would be best, of course. Also, a popup to select which tags to apply, which to clear, and which to leave as-is in the target file(s), would be very useful.
Any comments, Rusty et. al.?
- Tim
Warning: This is just a guess, I don't know enough details on the Tag synchronization to be sure if this would work, but I want to throw it out there as idea:
Would it not be sufficient to rip the new files to the same name as the old files. Make sure they don't have any tagging info in them (I'm pretty sure that you can tell Flac not to include any tags). Then overwrite the old files in the old location with the newly ripped file. After that MM should still see those files as online. Tell MM to sync the tags between database and files and that should put all the DB info in new tags in the FLAC files. It may be necessary to make sure that the timestamp of the file is the same or older than the old file, but I don't think so.
This would only fail if tag sync would somehow delete info in the database because the tags were missing in the actual file.
Abel
Would it not be sufficient to rip the new files to the same name as the old files. Make sure they don't have any tagging info in them (I'm pretty sure that you can tell Flac not to include any tags). Then overwrite the old files in the old location with the newly ripped file. After that MM should still see those files as online. Tell MM to sync the tags between database and files and that should put all the DB info in new tags in the FLAC files. It may be necessary to make sure that the timestamp of the file is the same or older than the old file, but I don't think so.
This would only fail if tag sync would somehow delete info in the database because the tags were missing in the actual file.
Abel