Converting SHN to FLAC?

[Von]

I've been sorting through my Can shows lately and I have several of them in SHN. Some of them haven't been in circulation for a few years and the lineages on some are in need of sorting as well.

My real question is this: as long as the step of converting said SHN files to FLAC is listed in the lineage would this be considered an acceptable practice?

I ask this because it seems that use of SHN and APE has fallen out of practice in the last few years and I would like to re offer these recordings again once all the sorting is done.

Another question: is renaming files to fit an organizational standard considered a verboten practice? if not, would that need to be included in the lineage as well?

[Teembo]

Absolutely...FLAC is totally the way to go now. If you don't convert them first, then hundreds of others will probably have to do it themselves...save em the trouble.
If you really want to please potential downloaders then make sure to completely tag the files with the proper metadata.

[Audioarchivist]

There are those that would argue that you should keep these filesets in their original "legacy" editions and NOT be modified from their original versions.

These have been traded before in this format. They exist in this state. Others do have them. Someone else might be able to help seed these files in their original format. Nobody will be able to help with a needless re-conversion.

I vote not to re-convert to another format.

[delfman]

i think the most preferred method is to convert them to flac and to tag them but there is a set way to do this. you can't just convert shn>flac
first you create a st5 of the shn files
then convert the shn's to wav
then the wavs to flac
then create a ffp of the new flacs.
make sure the new ffp's are identical to the st5 of the shn's
then you can delete the shn's and wav's but keep the st5 to seed with the new flacs so everyone knows that the new flacs are identical to the original shn's
hope I didn't confuse you.

[Von]

Originally Posted by delfman

i think the most preferred method is to convert them to flac and to tag them but there is a set way to do this. you can't just convert shn>flac
first you create a st5 of the shn files
then convert the shn's to wav
then the wavs to flac
then create a ffp of the new flacs.
make sure the new ffp's are identical to the st5 of the shn's
then you can delete the shn's and wav's but keep the st5 to seed with the new flacs so everyone knows that the new flacs are identical to the original shn's
hope I didn't confuse you.

no confusion here. I forgot to mention that I realize that I should also keep the original info file as well so that way the steps I took will be obvious when all is said and done.

[Unidecker]

i say use traders little helper and so long as all the files covert/check fine with md5's and
shntool then just add the conversion info into the text and continue with same text/info and filesets.

[Karst]

No way to do this on Mac yet, is there?

[AAR.oner]

don't think xACT will direct convert shn>flac, but i prefer decode to wav first anyway...maybe XLD will do it, you tried that one?

[Karst]

I tried XLD, no joy. Using my old Sony Vaio for it instead. Doesn't have a DVD burner though, so it is a bit of lenghty process.

[Von]

I found that Traders Little Helper converts directly to FLAC from SHN.

Oddly enough, I found another interesting wrinkle on my first project. Following delfman's advice, I created an st5 file. it was there that I was presented with a problem. The new ST5 fingerprints did not match the MD5 fingerprints listed on the info sheet. Oddly enough, after conversion to FLAC, the new MD5 matched the ST5 the way delfman said it should. Would I be safe in assuming that there has been some "tweaking" done to the recordings that wasn't mentioned in the info sheet and account for it? or just leave all the info in a heap for someone else to figure out?

[rspencer]

st5 of the old SHN files should match ffp of the new flac files, not necessarily match md5s.

[Von]

Originally Posted by rspencer

st5 of the old SHN files should match ffp of the new flac files, not necessarily match md5s.

Okay. That's what I needed to know. Thanks.

[delfman]

Originally Posted by Von

I found that Traders Little Helper converts directly to FLAC from SHN.

Oddly enough, I found another interesting wrinkle on my first project. Following delfman's advice, I created an st5 file. it was there that I was presented with a problem. The new ST5 fingerprints did not match the MD5 fingerprints listed on the info sheet. Oddly enough, after conversion to FLAC, the new MD5 matched the ST5 the way delfman said it should. Would I be safe in assuming that there has been some "tweaking" done to the recordings that wasn't mentioned in the info sheet and account for it? or just leave all the info in a heap for someone else to figure out?

If you convert shn to flac directly the fingerprints will not match to the originals.
you need to first convert the shns to wav then the wavs to flac if you want the fp's to match the originals.

[germain]

Originally Posted by delfman

If you convert shn to flac directly the fingerprints will not match to the originals. you need to first convert the shns to wav then the wavs to flac if you want the fp's to match the originals.
Reply With Quote

If I am not mistaken when TLH converts shn>flac it does go through the conversion to wav then to flac. The wav files are not saved though.

The st5 signatures of the shn files will match the st5 or ffp signatures of the new flac files. Md5's are whole file checksums which check the container structure as well as audio data and won't match in any format conversion. St5's & ffp's are only checking the actual audio data which should be exactly the same when converting between lossless formats.

[co9ol]

Originally Posted by Karst

No way to do this on Mac yet, is there?

xACT will do direct shn->FLAC conversions. Just drop them in the encode tab select FLAC and go!

I just used it to convert some old Rush shows.
I had an ST5 of the shn so I made an ST5 of the Flac, opened both is text edit, copied over the hexadecimal number and verified.
Everything turned out ok