Reconsider ISO posting policy?

[PencilGeek]

Originally Posted by dude87

I've got no issues with you deciding how you want to share your recordings, they're your recordings and you can do whatever you want with them. Personally, when I transfer analog masters to digital I cut the songs into individual tracks first and then author a DVD Audio - it's the easiest way for me to be able to break the DVD Audio disc into individual songs. Also, I can take a higher-resolution analog/digital conversion and then use Audacity to convert to 44.1/16 for regular CD. Once I've created individual WAV files for all the tracks converting them to FLAC is pretty easy. But if that's not how you work that's okay by me.

That's exactly how I do it, and have always done it. But outside of cutting/pasting your regions to individual (new) files, how are you breaking down the songs into individual files? I prefer working with flat files, not individual files consisting of a single song. But I wouldn't mind breaking it up into individual songs from the regions if there were a convenient and relatively painless way to do it.

/PG

[chinajoe]

i wouldnt think it would be a big deal. i take it these files would be able to be converted to wav if we want to take them in the car, portable while biking.

[PencilGeek]

Originally Posted by chinajoe

i wouldnt think it would be a big deal. i take it these files would be able to be converted to wav if we want to take them in the car, portable while biking.

You wouldn't need to. For any DVD-Audio I released, I would have already released a CD-Audio (FLAC) version of the same thing. The DVD-Audio would just be a higher quality version of the same thing.

/PG

I guess the older, free versions of CD Wave can't handle 24 bit files, I just tried it. But the new versions can:
http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=509705
"Track : CD-Wave 1.96.1"

I'm not a taper but there are lots of 24 bit recorders that will provide real 48 volt phantom power, with no need for a separate preamp, including the SD 722 and 744, Tascam HD-P2, some Edirol models I think. I think the Sound Devices are regarded as the best.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Audio_CD

The process of creating a DSD signal is conceptually similar to taking a 1-bit delta-sigma analog-to-digital (A/D) converter and removing the decimator which converts the 1-bit bitstream into multibit PCM. Instead, the 1-bit signal is recorded directly and in theory only requires a lowpass filter to reconstruct the original analog waveform. In reality it is a little more complex, and the analogy is incomplete in that 1-bit sigma-delta converters are these days rather unusual, one reason being that a 1-bit signal cannot be dithered properly: most modern sigma-delta converters are multibit.

Because of the nature of sigma-delta converters, one cannot make a direct comparison between DSD and PCM. An approximation is possible, though, and would place DSD in some aspects comparable to a PCM format that has a bit depth of 20 bits and a sampling frequency of 192 kHz. PCM sampled at 24 bits provides a (theoretical) additional 24 dB of dynamic range. Due to the effects of quantization noise, the usable bandwidth of the SACD format is approximately 100 kHz, which is similar to 192 kHz PCM.

Because it has been extremely difficult to carry out DSP operations (for example performing EQ, balance, panning and other changes in the digital domain) in a 1-bit environment, and because of the prevalence of studio equipment such as Pro Tools, which is solely PCM-based, the vast majority of SACDs — especially rock and contemporary music which relies on multitrack techniques — are in fact mixed in PCM (or mixed analog and recorded on PCM recorders) and then converted to DSD for SACD mastering.

To address some of these issues, a new studio format has been developed, usually referred to as "DSD-wide", which retains standard DSD's high sample rate but uses an 8-bit, rather than single-bit digital word length, but still relies heavily on the noise shaping principle. It becomes almost the same as PCM (it's sometimes disparagingly referred to as "PCM-narrow") but has the added benefit of making DSP operations in the studio a great deal more practical. The main difference is that "DSD-wide" still retains 2.8224 MHz (64Fs) sampling frequency while the highest frequency in which PCM is being edited is 352.8 kHz (8Fs). The "DSD-wide" signal is down-converted to regular DSD for SACD mastering. As a result of this technique and other developments there are now a few digital audio workstations (DAWs) which operate, or can operate, in the DSD domain, notably Pyramix and some SADiE systems.

It says that a lot of modern AD converters start off as multibit, unlike a lot of older converters that were 1 bit/high sample rate.

From the Swedish article:

One-bit converters for CD-players often use sampling rates between 11 and 50 MHz. The best one-bit converter probably is JVC's PEM-DD and it is much better than DSD. This said with reservation, I might have missed some even better one-bit technology than PEM-DD. But as far as I know this is the technology that comes closest to true multi bit technology in resolution.

The resolution/ information doubles when you double the sampling frequency (it is possible to be more specific, but for this example it is enough). But to double the resolution using PCM, you only have to add one more bit. If you go from 1 to 16 bits (adding 15 bits which use approximately 15 times more storage space), the resolution increases 65,536 times (from one step to 65,536 steps).

There is also another essential difference; the increase in resolution you achieve from raising the sampling frequency will be frequency dependant. A one-bit system will therefore have high resolution at low frequencies (where the information theoretically is low) and have low resolution at high frequencies (where the information theoretically is high).

By the use of noise shaping of high order, it is possible to increase the resolution at "quite high frequencies" at the expense of resolution at very high frequencies, but only for static, non transient signals. Transient signals will have poor resolution in a one-bit system. If the signal does not endure for a long enough time, the error will not be minimised by the noise shaper of the one bit system.

That's why you can read in documents from Burr Brown (who manufactures both one-bit and multi-bit converters) that you should use multi-bit converters for "waveform synthesis applications requiring very low distortion and noise". They have not written this for nothing.

A one-bit converter (i.e. the DSD system) cannot regenerate a short pulse with stringent form. It will change form from moment to moment. Every identical recorded pulse will show up with a new form.

[PencilGeek]

I guess I fell for that troll.

Now, back to the subject of DVD-Audio authoring. Does DVD-V LPCM support 96/24 or is it limited to 48/16?

/PG

Originally Posted by Tubular

Didn't see your last post. Audio DVD Creator will create audio only DVD-Vs with a menu using uncompressed LPCM at 16/48, 24/48, or 24/96, and it is only $40.
http://www.audio-dvd-creator.com/

Thread hijack, maybe.

But your question was already answered on page 1.

[PencilGeek]

Originally Posted by Tubular

Thread hijack, maybe.

But your question was already answered on page 1.

You know, until I read this, I almost forgot how dumb I was, and why I quit trading my shows for nearly 20 years.

/PG

You're kidding me, right? Lots of folks seed 24 bit FLACs. It's the trading standard at etree, dime, TTD, elsewhere. I didn't attack you personally or anything, it's just a discussion. Yes DVD-V can handle uncompressed 16/48, 24/48, or 24/96, and that's it, no other uncompressed resolutions. The only lossless compression (smaller sizes, so faster to download and upload) for the DVD format costs 3 grand for the license, but FLAC (Free Lossless Audio Codec) is free. I shouldn't have brought up the DSD vs. PCM thing, that is a different subject. Sorry if I gave you a bad first impression of what The Traders' Den is like.

Stick around, once you get the hang of preparing a fileset and seeding it, it is a breeze.

I'm not a mod, I have no final say about whether they will allow a DVD-A .iso

[direwolf-pgh]

Originally Posted by PencilGeek

That's exactly how I do it, and have always done it. But outside of cutting/pasting your regions to individual (new) files, how are you breaking down the songs into individual files? I prefer working with flat files, not individual files consisting of a single song. But I wouldn't mind breaking it up into individual songs from the regions if there were a convenient and relatively painless way to do it.

/PG

what did you use at that audio engineering school you went to?

I'm going to add two cents - cause this thread is killing me.
Everyone is dancing around the question you asked - as to not 'hurt your feelings' - whatever. Id rather give you an honest and direct response.

1. You're using the wrong program to work with audio, attempting to create DVD-A, etc.. IMO.
2. Should any forum change their seeding policy because you're having issues.... um, no.

You are not the first to create a DVD-A or work with higher bitrate files.
You are the first to believe a new seeding policy is needed to deal with these files.

Pencilgeek, why do you believe a new policy is needed ?

[weedwacker]

Here is how I author dvd hybrid discs(dvd video with an audio only track) at 24bit/48000kHz.

I make the assumption that you already transferred and have your raw wav file/files sampled/downsampled to 24/48 and you are working on a windows os. All programs used are freeware or shareware with no restrictions on usage.

Programs used
cd wave
http://www.milosoftware.com/cdwave/

flac encoder and frontend
http://flac.sourceforge.net/download.html

Lplex
http://sourceforge.net/projects/audioplex/

Step 1: Track raw wav files
Purpose to prepare wav files so you can fast foward on the final author to where you want(same as chapter points on video)
This step is optional but recommended.

1. Open cdwave and load in your raw wav file.
2. Choose your split points.
3. Once you've set your split points and renamed your output files accordingly choose save pick your output directory and choose output mode as direct wav.
4. Rinse and repeat if you have more than one raw wav file you want to track just make sure all the final tracked wav files are named so they are sequentally listed.

notes: cdwave does support input and output of 24bit wav files and flac files.

Step 2: Compress and decompress tracked wav files using flac
Purpose: To fix the header of the wav files of any nonstandard information that may cause problems during playback or authoring. This may happen from the a/d conversion or during the downsampling process depending on what you use.
The step is optional but recommended if you are not certain.

1. Open flac frontend and set the compression level to 0(for speed purposes only).

2. Compress then decompress the wav files. The compression process will strip and fix any errors in the wav header if they exist.

Step 3: Author your dvd-a

1. Drag and drop your folder with your finished wav files onto the Lplex.exe file in windows explorer/my computer.
2. Wait until it is finished and that is it.

Advantages to Lplex.
1. Lplex will do gapless chaptering so there is no skips between chapters.
2. No menus when authoring.
3. Lplex will add an xtra folder which you can add your txt file, pictures, md5 files etc that is valid in folder structure for burning dvds and won't affect playback.

You can track out your files with the very easy to use program CD Wave, it's only $15 (tons of ppl use it):
http://www.milosoftware.com/cdwave/index.html

Or you can use the free program Audacity:
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

CD Wave is the tool of choice though.

[PencilGeek]

Originally Posted by direwolf-pgh

what did you use at that audio engineering school you went to?

LOL. Back in the days I took audio engineering, we used Ampex 24-track 3-inch reel-to-reel multi-track decks to record, and mixed down to 1/2 track 1/4-inch decks for studio masters. There were no such things as a CDs, DVDs, or even software to record or modify audio. Heck, this was right before the IBM-PC was first introduced.

I wasn't trying to make a point about the skills I learned in audio engineering to work with software, I was making the point about the skills learned to mix down, equalize, compress if necessary, minimize noise, splice things together and create a master reference recording. I was saying I believed I could do a better job than Joe Sixpack at mastering my own recordings.

I'm going to add two cents - cause this thread is killing me.
Everyone is dancing around the question you asked - as to not 'hurt your feelings' - whatever. Id rather give you an honest and direct response.

1. You're using the wrong program to work with audio, attempting to create DVD-A, etc.. IMO.
2. Should any forum change their seeding policy because you're having issues.... um, no.

By all means, let's not step on anybody's sensibilities. I've purchased and used 6 or 8 audio and video editing packages (maybe even more). I've even purchased two or three Blu-Ray editing packages, and we all know those aren't cheap. Some of these programs do things well, others aren't worth a dime. I've also used a few of these low-end, free, or nearly free packages (although not the ones specifically mentioned in this thread). In my experience, they are pure pieces of crap that are barely worth a dime. They are either completly impossible to use, or don't do eveything I want, or crash with the very first I use them. And as a software writer by trade, there's nothing that pisses me off more than a piece of software that crashes the first time I try to use it. I've become a firm believer in 'you get what you pay for.' (Even though WaveLab isn't cheap, I believe it's mostly a piece of crap also...but at least it creates a DVD-A.) So while we're not stepping on sensibilities here, let me say that if mediocrity is your standard, then you will always be satisfied with your results.

You are not the first to create a DVD-A or work with higher bitrate files.
You are the first to believe a new seeding policy is needed to deal with these files.

Pencilgeek, why do you believe a new policy is needed ?

I don't necessarily believe a new policy is needed. As a previous guy responded: it's only a discussion. I'm completely open-minded about the possibilities of changing software or doing things a little differently in order to get the same end result.

File sizes, download speeds, etc. are pure emotional arguments to me. I don't care about file sizes and download speeds. I don't care if somebody only wants to play it on their computer. It's more important to me that somebody have a true and accurate rendition of my master recording as I mastered it, than it is for me to care how long it took them to download it, or how and where they will play it. Remember, I don't master my shows to CD-Audio or DVD-Audio for the benevolence of mankind; I do it for myself and if others can benefit as a byproduct, then everybody goes away happy. I'm already doing them the favor by making the shows available; it's not incumbent on me to spend an extra minute of my time or dollar of my money to give it away in a format other than the one I created for my own personal use. Therefore, if there's some tool I can use to create 96/24 FLAC files without any substantial invenstment in my time or money, then I'm willing to do it. Otherwise...too bad...you lose...because we all know I don't lose...I own the recordings.

Now that we haven't stepped on anybody's sensibilities, I am very curious what tools are available that might do what you want, with the least amount of time and/or investment on my part. Are there tools that can read a WAV file with regions meta-data and break up into FLAC files? Or is there an audio editing package that will read a regions list and/or CUE list and auto break apart into individual files? Because as I said earlier, if I have to break down a flat WAV file by hand into 31 individual files, I'm not interested in that type of time investment. Doing so would also make my own projects (my personal use) messier and more time-intensive to create and maintain.

Likewise, if there was a DVD-V program that could simply be pointed to a 96/24 WAV file with regions and/or CUE, and would simply and conveniently create the output with a basic text-based menu (again, without any apreciable time or intervention on my part), then I'd certainly be willing to give it a try.

Finally, back to the main topic. I don't think offering ISO's will break the backs of the trading community. I believe I understand why they are disallowed (I think I read it's because of the risk of unauthorized or inappropriate material being released). I believe these are all problems that can be solved with a little effort and creative thinking. And from my point of view, it certainly solves a lot of nagging problems about distribution and the competence of Joe Sixpack and his abilities to recreate the master as I intended it to be heard.

As an aside, and at the expense of hijacking my own topic, I'd really love to know how many of these people wanting 96/24 FLAC files have nothing more to play it on than their PC's with 1" speakers attached...or even a "high-end" computer speaker set up. How many of you guys are really hooking your computers up to $10000 (or more) of audio gear to play these 96/24 files? Because if you're not, you're really fooling yourselves into thinking you'll benefit with these files.

/PG

[PencilGeek]

Originally Posted by Tubular

You can track out your files with the very easy to use program CD Wave, it's only $15 (tons of ppl use it):
http://www.milosoftware.com/cdwave/index.html

Or you can use the free program Audacity:
http://audacity.sourceforge.net/

CD Wave is the tool of choice though.

I'll look at CD Wave tonight. If it does what I want, then everybody will certainly be happy.

/PG

Once you track out the files with CD Wav, you can compress to FLAC for free with FLAC frontend:
http://flac.sourceforge.net/download.html
Then seed 24/96 FLACs if you want to go that route.

This is a very simple program, only $40, for creating an audio only DVD-V with a simple menu. Just drag the tracked out .wavs into it:
http://www.audio-dvd-creator.com/

I have heard a huge difference between CDs and 24 bit DVD-As when just played back on a system consisting of a $300 receiver, $200 DVD-A/V player, and $300 bookshelf speakers. I agree, unless you are sending a coax or optical to a receiver or pre/pro from your computer, you aren't going to hear a huge difference on typical computer speakers with a 16 bit soundcard. If you had great computer speakers with a good 24 bit soundcard, that's different. But then there will be all the electrostatic noise and stuff.