[Flac-dev] compression
hi can we expect much better compression (like the step to v. 1.2.x) in future versions of the flac encoder or are we at maximum compression level now? thx ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
[FLAC] OS/2
hi, Is there anybody who tested flac and metaflac on OS/2 Warp 4 or is there anybody who can tell me if it will work on OS/2? thx -- 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg.' --Bjarne Stroustrup, The Creator of C++ 'And so at last the beast fell and the unbelievers rejoiced. But all was not lost, for from the ash rose a great bird. The bird gazed down upon the unbelievers and cast fire and thunder upon them. For the beast had been reborn with its strength renewed, and the followers of Mammon cowered in horror.' --From The Book of Mozilla, 7:15 ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] compression level
hi I was wondering how many difference in % of cpu load (on same cpu) exists between compression level 1 and 8 while decoding. Also same question for encoding. Is the difference in % of cpu load while decoding/encoding the reason different compression levels were created or another reason? thx -- 'C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot; C++ makes it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg.' --Bjarne Stroustrup, The Creator of C++ 'And so at last the beast fell and the unbelievers rejoiced. But all was not lost, for from the ash rose a great bird. The bird gazed down upon the unbelievers and cast fire and thunder upon them. For the beast had been reborn with its strength renewed, and the followers of Mammon cowered in horror.' --From The Book of Mozilla, 7:15 ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[flac] decoding with -F
hi flac list, I read on the site about the decoding -F (or --decode-through-errors) feature: ' By default flac stops decoding with an error and removes the partially decoded file if it encounters a bitstream error. With -F, errors are still printed but flac will continue decoding to completion. Note that errors may cause the decoded audio to be missing some samples or have silent sections.' So is it true that when decoding with -F option, there are only 3 possibilities: - the decoded sample is error-free and is added to the WAV file - the decoded sample has an error but instead this sample is not added to the WAV file (so it's just thrown away) - the decoded sample has an error but instead a silent sample is added to the WAV file (so you can hear in fact silence when there are a lot of samples of this kind directly after each other) is this above correct or are there more situations that can occur in the case of corrupted flac files you want to decode using -F? thx in advance ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [flac] md5 checksum
2007/10/19, Josh Coalson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: --- Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hi here some questions about the md5 checksum: - what happens when the md5 checksum of the decoded audio is different of the internally stored checksum due to file corruption ? Will playing/decoding still be possible (with some error frames) or will playing /decoding be not possible at all (so all audio data is lost)? md5 does not affect decoding at all, it is a just a checksum to tell you at the end if it matches the whole audio or not. thanks for the answer, but then there is wrong information on some sites that tell about flac :s. There is written the flac decoder doesn't decode the audio at all when the md5 checksum doesn't match. - what happens when the metadata blocks get corrupt? will the audio part still be decodable even when non-audio blocks are corrupt? yes - since there is only a md5 checksum on the audio blocks itself, what happens when some wav metadata gets corrupt and you want to decode that data? How can the decoder detect it's corrupt or not because there is no md5 checksum for this data? depends on the corruption, some kinds are recoverable, some are not. read the format spec first and it should become clear. Why is there no md5 checksum on the WAV metadata? Because how can flac otherwise be called a 'lossless' codec when the metadata of the WAV file can't be guaranteed 100% identical to the original, when there is file corruption, because there is no md5 checksum on it? thx Harry Josh __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[flac] maybe include new win32 frontend?
hi flac developers, A user here gave me a link to an amazing win32 frontend for flac (and also other encoders): Trader's Little Helper (http://thor.prohosting.com/roh0205/ ) Maybe this frontend can be added to the win32 flac installer instead of flac frontend? I see many good reasons for this: - flac frontend isn't really updated anymore, while Trader's Little Helper is updated frequently - this frontend solves all limitations the current flac frontend has - this frontend even allows creation of ffp files and verifying using ffp files by verifying if the checksums in the ffp file match the ones in the flac file header and also by verifying if the checksum of the uncompressed data matches the one in the flac file header: so a full verify (the current flac frontend doesn't allow verifying using ffp files) - it even has a GUI feature to fix sector boundary errors - ... much more (just check the program) I would love to hear the opinion of Josh to this. thx in advance Harry ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[flac] flac fingerprint
hi, i found this explanation of the flac fingerprint somewhere: 'A FLAC Fingerprint is generated only for the audio data portion of the file. (Therefore, changing the filename or the tags or FlacMetadata does not change the fingerprint calculation.) In contrast, an .md5 is generated against the whole file, including header portions.' so i was wondering what advantages it could give me to make a ffp file, because there is already a internally stored md5 checksum on the decoded audio data inside the flac file? What extra advantage does a ffp file give me while only considering the need to verify the audio data. i was also wondering how files encoded by using the new --keep-existing-metadata option are verified when using -verify. Is there a separate internally stored md5 for metadata next to the md5 for decoded audio data or how is everything verified? Is making a ffp file for such files also possible for the non-audio data (so all metadata)? i hope somebody can make this more clear, because it's rather confusing. i was also wondering if there exists a GUI program for win32 to verify flac files using a ffp file (so not md5check.exe) thx in advance ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] flac streaming server
hi i'm looking for a flac streaming server for win32. can anybody point me to the best servers there are? what clients support flac streaming to connect to my server (also win32)? to the flac dev's: what network speed would be required to stream cd audio compressed flac files without hearing gaps in the music? thx in advance! ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [flac] re-encode tool win32
2007/9/28, Aaron Whitehouse [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Under linux/bash, it would be something like
cd /MusicDirectory
find . -type f -name *.flac -exec sh -c 'flac -t {} flac -8V {}'
\;
Wouldn't it be nice if it was something closer to:
flac --reencode --recursive -8 *.flac
I think this would be a great feature, in this way re-encoding in windows,
linux, ... can happen the same way without complicated scripts (that maybe
even don't work in windows because of crappy wildcard support, ...)
are there plans to implement this? It's a clean way to re-encode all files I
think.
Harry
Aaron
___
Flac mailing list
Flac@xiph.org
http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] win32 installer 1.2.1a vs 1.2.1b
hi I have just downloaded the win32 installer 1.2.1b and uninstalled my previous version 1.2.1a. But I don't see any difference in both installers: they both have flac frontend and flac tester and the command line tools flac.exe and metaflac.exe. So can somebody tell me please what the difference is between 1.2.1a and 1.2.1b? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] win32 installer
hi are there other people who have trouble with the win32 installer? When I try to install it to windows 98 it crashes when run. thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] installer
hi what windows versions are supported by the win32 installer? are there plans for a linux installer (statically linked lib's)? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] flac: wav64 support
hi does the flac encoder officially supports wav64? i have a big collection of wav64 files (26 TB for each file and bigger) but didn't had the courage to encode them with flac. Cpu power is no problem (i have intel V8) but i just want to know if flac supports wav64 or not as input ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] Flac: metadata
hi is compression of metadata of the wav file enabled by default or only when using explicitly the new command line option in v1.2.1? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] flac installer
hi the new flac installer does not work: when you install it (I have windows 98) it just crashes no matter how many time you try to install it ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [Flac-dev] Re: multiple core support
2007/9/9, Josh Coalson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: --- Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2007/9/8, Josh Coalson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: it actually is complicated. the libFLAC api is not suited to a multithreaded design because the i/o is stream-based, not file- based. flac(.exe) is the file-based wrapper around libFLAC that allows it to work on files. the way libFLAC buffers data is also impossible to parallelize without significantly changing the api. why was this approach used? because the tradeoffs I described required for arbitrarily parallel encoding significantly complicate the api and implementation. libFLAC was not design for multicode file encoding on PCs, it is a reference design that is also being used in embedded devices running 100MHz, low memory, all kinds of different OSes, etc. euh :) Just make a flag or something in the api that enables the code for low cpu power devices and/or streaming and disable this when encoding on fast pc (so no streaming)? So it uses file based code then for encoding of files on pc's with multiple cpu's and stream based code for all other devices and streaming :) Then you have both in the API! The API design seems to me not very smart because it's not flexible and you're stuck in the future (like now for multiple core support) I don't see any reason why you wouldn't make it all based on files and not on streams :s It's just a major disavantage in my opinion an api cannot be all things to everyone. sure it can: you just have to make some different cases (low cpu power device/streaming or multi-core cpu) and call the apprioprate functions you keep making this assertion but if you actually tried to implement it (and I hope you will) the problems we are all bringing up will quickly become obvious. your own lame-mt example is not an incremental improvement but a significant rewrite of lame (and also does not have nearly the performance advantage of process-level parallelism, see http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=50862) It's multi-threaded and that's what I mean: people here say an audio codec can't be written multi-threaded and it will give no performance boost: 1) that's false: se LAME MT 2) performance boost up to 30%: see LAME MT again For very large files you must wait not so long before it's encoded vs. the original LAME. it would take a specialty file-based encoder using an independent frame encoder to do and even that is not trivial. so we can assume that those API changes will never come and the flac encoder will never have multiple core support? you can assume libFLAC will probably not have it. if you can modify libFLAC to make a multithreaded encoder like flac-mt that would be neat and probably useful to some people. until that time there is not much point repeating the same assertions which are just going to aggravate people. Josh Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
Re: [Flac-dev] Re: multiple core support
2007/9/8, Scot Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: No, streams should stay. Audio is NOT a file based process -- it's a stream. You can't listen to an entire song simultaneously. You organize it into files for later use, but you listen and record from a stream. Stream-based storage is practically REQUIRED for an audio codec. It's not random access, it's sequential. You can put wrappers around it to make it convenient for file storage and conversions, but the codec itself must be streams. Multi-core support may not be practical for a variable-length encoding. How would you know where to write the next block when you don't know what size the first block is going to be? The functionality for that is not trivial and is not currently implemented in the API. Maybe somebody will write a multi-core file-based wrapper for you, or maybe you could try writing one yourself. Or if you disagree with Josh about the direction of FLAC you can write your own codec. But your nattering on and on about how you think the API isn't right doesn't help at all and is very annoying. I just say that the way it is now it's IMpossible to make multiple core support, that's all. It's just a fact :) Harry -- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Harry Sack *Sent:* Saturday, September 08, 2007 6:06 AM *To:* Brian Willoughby *Cc:* flac-dev@xiph.org *Subject:* Re: [Flac-dev] Re: multiple core support 2007/9/8, Brian Willoughby [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ralph, The problem is that there is no clear advantage, at least in terms of multiple cores, to the approach you're asking about. In order to allow each stage of the codec to overlap, you need smart buffering between each stage. That adds code and complexity which isn't there currently. So you end up making the system do more work in the hopes that there will be some overlap. Basically, later stages get blocked waiting for their input buffer to fill, which means that you're not really getting very much overlap at all, but plenty of multi- threading overhead. At least that's the predicted result - I admit that nobody has tried this, to my knowledge. this is because of the limitations/design problem of FLAC API in particular. When the developers had made a smart decision and based everything on file based I/O you would get a HUGE performance boos when using multiple threads divided between multiple cores, because they only thing to do was to split the file output in different threads. But it's not clear to me why everything was based on streams... Harry Brian Willoughby Sound Consulting On Sep 7, 2007, at 18:25, Ralph Giles wrote: On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 04:59:50PM -0700, Josh Coalson wrote: it actually is complicated. the libFLAC api is not suited to a multithreaded design because the i/o is stream-based, not file- based. flac(.exe) is the file-based wrapper around libFLAC that allows it to work on files. the way libFLAC buffers data is also impossible to parallelize without significantly changing the api. It seems like buffering (especially compressed) blocks and writing them to the stream in sequence wouldn't be a problem. Is there something in the way the blocking decisions are made that makes it hard to divide the input audio this way? -r ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
Re: [Flac-dev] Re: multiple core support
2007/9/8, Josh Coalson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: it actually is complicated. the libFLAC api is not suited to a multithreaded design because the i/o is stream-based, not file- based. flac(.exe) is the file-based wrapper around libFLAC that allows it to work on files. the way libFLAC buffers data is also impossible to parallelize without significantly changing the api. why was this approach used? The API design seems to me not very smart because it's not flexible and you're stuck in the future (like now for multiple core support) I don't see any reason why you wouldn't make it all based on files and not on streams :s It's just a major disavantage in my opinion it would take a specialty file-based encoder using an independent frame encoder to do and even that is not trivial. so we can assume that those API changes will never come and the flac encoder will never have multiple core support? thx --- Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2007/9/7, Avuton Olrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 9/6/07, Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it's really not complicated I think: only api changes to write on any Please get started writing a patch, immediately. I'm just an IT student and I have no time for that :) I also didn't study the flac API in detail but I know it's perfectly possible because I made a avi encoder running on multiple threads once and it's exactly the same for audio data. -- avuton -- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
Re: [Flac] FLAC: win installer
2007/9/7, Josh Coalson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: - what windows versions are supported by the installer? I know it works at least back to nt4, not sure about earlier versions so all 9x versions are supported because they were released after nt 4? Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today! http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7 ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac-dev] Re: multiple core support
it's really not complicated I think: only api changes to write on any position in the file if that's not possible already with existing function. I'm not sure if decoding can have multi-core support: you need an api for writing pcm files in different parts then and this is maybe more difficult to check if it's valid pcm data since the decoder can only check for valid flac streams , not pcm streams i think. you can make recording also support multi cores: just let cpu 1 fill a pcm data buffer while cpu 2 encodes it. In this case you have a more reliable encoding with less cpu usage of your system (it's spread among 2 cpu's) 2007/9/7, Brian Willoughby [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hmm, You're actually correct, when you put it that way. Because the audio blocks are coded independently, you could speed things by having the encoder (or decoder) do a little up-front processing on the metadata, then use the overall settings to divide the file into sections and run the FLAC process in parallel. However, I think it is generally frowned upon in some circles to create one thread per processor, rather than making the division dependent upon some other factor that is actually independent of the number of processors. Apart from that caveat, someone could certainly develop an encoder or decoder which uses the FLAC library API to implement a threaded encoder/decoder - well, assuming that the API can write to subsets of a file, instead of requiring that the entire file be written from start to finish - and also assuming that the API can run in multiple threads and write to the same file. By your method, decoding would be faster, too. Not everybody decodes just to listen. Some of us keep original masters in FLAC format for archival purposes, but need the whole thing decoded before we can mix and master. Anything which speeds up decoding would help get work done faster. On the flip side, another thing to consider is that not all encoding is done with files that already exist. If you are recording live to FLAC, you cannot multi-thread the encoder because you don't have any audio besides the current block. So, decoding for playback and encoding for recording are two examples which cannot be multi-threaded. But file format conversion could be developed to take advantage of multiple processors. It would require a lot of tweaks to the library, perhaps. Note: PC games are multi-threaded because they're already doing several different things at once. Sometimes the complexity is actually reduced by dedicating a thread to each part of the game logic. And precisely because there are so many different things going on, multi-threading can speed things up when they overlap in unpredictable ways. Games would be harder to write in a single- threaded way. Meanwhile, encoding/decoding FLAC is easier to write in a single-threaded design. Brian W. On Sep 6, 2007, at 16:42, Harry Sack wrote: yes, i totally agree but I'm talking about the ENcoder :) You can perfectly 'cut' the pcm stream 'in half' and let 1 cpu encode one part , the other 2nd part (or with 4 cpu's in 4 parts, ...), because it's just a stream one frame after the other, as far as i know (correct me if i'm wrong). Many pc games synchronise multiple threads on 2 (even 4!) cores (much More complicated then reading frames, compressing, writing compressed frames like the encoder does), so i think making the encoder support 2 cpu's is perfectly possible. of course adding multi-core support to the decoder is silly because it's not necessary (any single core cpu is fast enough to play 1 file and it would only slow it down)! 2007/9/7, Brian Willoughby [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Any software which supports multiple processors must be multi- threaded. The process of designing multi-threaded code adds complexity to the software, so there must be a good reason to go through all the trouble. The procedure for decoding a single file could only benefit marginally from being multi-threaded, because most operations would need to wait until the previous operation was completed. One section of the decoder might be able to process several blocks, but the overall result would still need to wait until all blocks are completed. Besides, managing dynamic buffers between each step of the decoding process would actually require the decoder to do more, meaning it would slow down to an extent. There would pretty much be no difference in the total time, whether single processor or multiple processors. The best way to take advantage of multiple processors is to decode multiple FLAC files at the same time. This will take full advantage of your system, provided that the disk bandwidth and memory bandwidth can keep up. Brian W. ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
[Flac] FLAC: compression
hi list Is it possible that a particular kind of music gives a smaller file size with a lower compression then the best (level 8) compression or is this not possible ? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: win installer
hi list here some questions about the windows installer: - can the installer be used on 64 bit windows versions and/or is there a 64 bit version for the encoder/decoder? - what windows versions are supported by the installer? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: compressing data
hi can the flac encoder be used to compress non-wave data? So suppose I rename a data file to *.wav, can i compress it then using the flac encoder to make it smaller? just wondering if this is possible ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac-dev] FLAC: compression ratio
hi flac-dev list! I see, when compressing CD-audio tracks, I can reach up to 60% (ratio = 0.6x) of the original WAV file after compression. I was wondering if the FLAC codec could become as good as reaching 50% of the original WAV file in the future or if we are already at the (almost) maximum compression possible? thx ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
[Flac] Re: FLAC: headphones
Hi, I forgot to say the headphone must have a 3.5mm stereo jack plug to attach it the PDA. thx in advance! 2007/8/27, Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED]: hi flac list! I'm not sure if this question can be asked here, but here you go (it's a question for audiophiles only): I encode CDDA tracks to FLAC and play them on my Pocket PC (PDA). I'm looking for a high quality headphone to connect to my Pocket PC, but it must be an in-ear one but not like these: http://s7d1.scene7.com/is/image/vanns/770045336?$medium_item$ So no plastic things must be inserted to the ears, it must be a flat surface to put in your ears like these ones: http://www.maplin.co.uk/images/Full/a22fn.jpg . So I'm looking for a brand and type of headphones that will give extreme good audio quality (possibly the best audio quality you can reach using in-ear headphones) for playing lossless music files. BTW: I'm not looking for these type of headphones ( http://www.shopaxion.com/Headphone_Link/IR_headphone.jpg) only these kind ( http://www.maplin.co.uk/images/Full/a22fn.jpg), just to make this clear :) thx in advance ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac-dev] FLAC: general question
hi dev'ers is it true flac is developed in linux by Josh and later compiled in windows? I was also wondering if Josh implemented the flac encoder/decoder all by himself ? just some questions because I'm interested in flac in general :) thx ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
[Flac] concatenate
hi i have some small flac files and i want to concatenate to 1 big flac file, but without using ogg flac. Is this possible and how do i do this? i also was wondering if there exists a way to let the flac encoder remove audio frames of silence in the beginning and end of a wav input file when encoding? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [Flac] Re: FLAC: ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch
2007/7/25, Josh Coalson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: --- Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2007/7/25, Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi I have downloaded a FLAC file somewhere and when trying to decode it to WAV it gives the error message: ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch So my question is now: are FLAC files that give the error message above still decodable to WAV (and how can you do this, because flac.exe doesn't want to decode the file), even if there is a MD5 signature mismatch, or is this not possible at all? if that is the only error given even when decoded with -F, then it got all the samples back. they are also highly likely to be the same samples that were encoded. most likely they were encoded on a machine with bad hardware (bad ram, aggressive overclocking), less likely is that the file was corrupted or tampered with. But how is it possible then the FLAC encoder allows files which have a bad resulting MD5 to be encoded? Is it because of the bad ram, ... this incorrect MD5 is not detected during encoding? Can you also give me an example of an error message that would occur when the file is corrupted? ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] Re: FLAC: ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch
2007/7/25, Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi I have downloaded a FLAC file somewhere and when trying to decode it to WAV it gives the error message: ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch So my question is now: are FLAC files that give the error message above still decodable to WAV (and how can you do this, because flac.exe doesn't want to decode the file), even if there is a MD5 signature mismatch, or is this not possible at all? An additional question: what happens if you re-encode a FLAC file, that gives the error message 'ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch' while trying to decode to WAV, to another FLAC file using a later version of the FLAC encoder? I tried this and it seems to work, but I'm wondering if the audio data is still the same in the new file as in the old file? Or what happens in the re-encode process when such a input FLAC file is re-encoded to another FLAC file? thx in advance! thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch
Hi I have downloaded a FLAC file somewhere and when trying to decode it to WAV it gives the error message: ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch So my question is now: are FLAC files that give the error message above still decodable to WAV (and how can you do this, because flac.exe doesn't want to decode the file), even if there is a MD5 signature mismatch, or is this not possible at all? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: tool to re-encode (win32)
Hi i'm looking for a tool (it must run in win32) to re-encode existing FLAC files to a newer version of FLAC. I tried the FLAC frontend (included in the FLAC 1.2.0 installer) but this tool doesn't allow this (it only allows encoding of WAV files to FLAC files, re-encoding of FLAC files to FLAC files isn't supported). So I'm looking for a tool that can re-encode existing FLAC files without having manually to decode them to WAV. I tried to do this in the windows command prompt several times but there are too many problems with that windows prompt (no wildcard support if you use flac.exe, ...) so I prefer a graphical tool. I hope maybe somebody can help me thanks in advance ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] Re: FLAC: ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch
2007/7/25, Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 2007/7/25, Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi I have downloaded a FLAC file somewhere and when trying to decode it to WAV it gives the error message: ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch So my question is now: are FLAC files that give the error message above still decodable to WAV (and how can you do this, because flac.exedoesn't want to decode the file), even if there is a MD5 signature mismatch, or is this not possible at all? An additional question: what happens if you re-encode a FLAC file, that gives the error message 'ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch' while trying to decode to WAV, to another FLAC file using a later version of the FLAC encoder? I tried this and it seems to work, but I'm wondering if the audio data is still the same in the new file as in the old file? Or what happens in the re-encode process when such a input FLAC file is re-encoded to another FLAC file? Here is the metaflac --list of the input and output FLAC file, the input file is the file that gives the 'ERROR, MD5 signature mismatch' error when decoding to WAV. The output file is the newly re-encoded FLAC file when using the input file as an input to the FLAC encoder: metaflac --list input_file.flac METADATA block #0 type: 0 (STREAMINFO) is last: false length: 34 minimum blocksize: 1152 samples maximum blocksize: 1152 samples minimum framesize: 0 bytes maximum framesize: 4768 bytes sample_rate: 44100 Hz channels: 2 bits-per-sample: 16 total samples: 20527080 MD5 signature: 5f00690064003d005000200020002000 METADATA block #1 type: 4 (VORBIS_COMMENT) is last: false length: 287 vendor string: Flake SVN comments: 11 comment[0]: TITLE=Dido (Armin Van Buuren's Universal Religion Mix) comment[1]: ARTIST=Aria comment[2]: ALBUM ARTIST=DJ Tiësto comment[3]: ALBUM=Summerbreeze comment[4]: GENRE=General Trance comment[5]: DATE=2000 comment[6]: DISCNUMBER=1/1 comment[7]: PUBLISHER=Nettwerk comment[8]: COMMENT=Ripped by Winamp comment[9]: TRACKNUMBER=1 comment[10]: ENCODED-BY=Winamp 5.34 METADATA block #2 type: 1 (PADDING) is last: true length: 3826 ** metaflac --list output_file.flac METADATA block #0 type: 0 (STREAMINFO) is last: false length: 34 minimum blocksize: 4096 samples maximum blocksize: 4096 samples minimum framesize: 14 bytes maximum framesize: 14043 bytes sample_rate: 44100 Hz channels: 2 bits-per-sample: 16 total samples: 20527080 MD5 signature: 4478d07a5f9acaae35cdef1f1753c764 METADATA block #1 type: 3 (SEEKTABLE) is last: false length: 846 seek points: 47 point 0: sample_number=0, stream_offset=0, frame_samples=4096 point 1: sample_number=438272, stream_offset=1010333, frame_samples=4096 point 2: sample_number=880640, stream_offset=2027118, frame_samples=4096 point 3: sample_number=1318912, stream_offset=3048483, frame_samples=4096 point 4: sample_number=1761280, stream_offset=4067062, frame_samples=4096 point 5: sample_number=2203648, stream_offset=5063693, frame_samples=4096 point 6: sample_number=2641920, stream_offset=6081493, frame_samples=4096 point 7: sample_number=3084288, stream_offset=7139986, frame_samples=4096 point 8: sample_number=3526656, stream_offset=8223226, frame_samples=4096 point 9: sample_number=3964928, stream_offset=9324016, frame_samples=4096 point 10: sample_number=4407296, stream_offset=10366547, frame_samples=4096 point 11: sample_number=4849664, stream_offset=11436008, frame_samples=4096 point 12: sample_number=5287936, stream_offset=12491977, frame_samples=4096 point 13: sample_number=5730304, stream_offset=13715044, frame_samples=4096 point 14: sample_number=6172672, stream_offset=14963345, frame_samples=4096 point 15: sample_number=6610944, stream_offset=16294043, frame_samples=4096 point 16: sample_number=7053312, stream_offset=17663068, frame_samples=4096 point 17: sample_number=7495680, stream_offset=19027520, frame_samples=4096 point 18: sample_number=7933952, stream_offset=20380473, frame_samples=4096 point 19: sample_number=8376320, stream_offset=21739699, frame_samples=4096 point 20: sample_number=8818688, stream_offset=23101828, frame_samples=4096 point 21: sample_number=9256960, stream_offset=24461617, frame_samples=4096 point 22: sample_number=9699328, stream_offset=25856237, frame_samples=4096 point 23: sample_number=10141696, stream_offset=27254435, frame_samples=4096 point 24: sample_number=10579968, stream_offset=28648219, frame_samples=4096 point 25: sample_number=11022336, stream_offset=30041445, frame_samples=4096 point 26: sample_number=11464704, stream_offset=31425625, frame_samples=4096 point 27: sample_number=11902976, stream_offset=32813313, frame_samples=4096 point 28: sample_number=12345344, stream_offset=34237869, frame_samples=4096 point 29: sample_number=12787712
[Flac] FLAC: FLAC frontend
hi, Does anybody know where the official website of the FLAC frontend (for windows) is? If you look here http://members.home.nl/w.speek/ you can see the FLAC frontend is not longer maintained by Speek but in the FLAC installer there is still and update to the frontend (version 1.7.1 vs. version 1.7 on Speek's website). So I was wondering where the official site for the FLAC frontend is located now. thx in advance ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] Re: FLAC: re-encoding
2007/7/25, Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED]: hi I have some questions about re-encoding existing FLAC files to FLAC 1.2.0 .: - can older 1.1.x FLAC files be re-encoded to FLAC 1.2.0 by using the FLAC 1.2.0 encoder? - can FLAC files encoded with the FLAC Flake SVN encoder (or any other 'unofficial' FLAC encoder) be re-encoded by using the FLAC 1.2.0 encoder? To be a bit more clear: I mean of course re-encoding the FLAC files without decoding them to WAV files manually, so by letting the FLAC encoder do all the work. thx thx in advance! ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [Flac] FLAC: editing software
2007/7/23, Greg M. [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I just tried this with Goldwave.. it decoded the file, i edited out some stuff, and saved the file (flac format) and the tags appear to be intact. thanks a lot, it seems to work with Goldwave. Exactly what I was looking for! thx Greg M. --- Tomas Valusek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, and what if I want to preserve FLAC tags while I'm editing its contents? Is there a way e.g. to cut silent block from FLAC and preserve tags? By uncompressing to WAV, I lose all tag info. Tomas Valusek Greg M. napsal(a): Hairy, I've used Goldwave (goldwave.com) (trialware) for awhile now for editing WAVs. It will take care of de-compressing from FLAC, but I don't know what happens when you save back as a FLAC, I haven't tried that. If you are really wanting to edit the FLAC file, I don't think it makes sense to do this without converting to WAV. It's like editing a ZIP file of Microsoft Word documents without decompressing to Word format. Good luck. --- Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yes I know I can do that, but my question is if there is software to edit FLAC files without having to uncompress to WAV/recompress to FLAC. 2007/7/23, Avuton Olrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 7/23/07, Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hi does somebody know software for editing FLAC files? So I just want to cut some pieces out of the file (for example silence in front of a recording) Uncompress the file, run wavbreaker on it, use wavmerge as necessary, recompress. -- avuton -- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: general question
hi FLAC list! I have a general question about the FLAC decoder. Is it true the FLAC decoder requires less CPU power then a MP3 decoder? And if yes, is there somebody who can give me a comparison e.g. FLAC decoder uses 50% less CPU power then a MP3 decoder or is this difference only minimal? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [Flac] FLAC: editing software
yes I know I can do that, but my question is if there is software to edit FLAC files without having to uncompress to WAV/recompress to FLAC. 2007/7/23, Avuton Olrich [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 7/23/07, Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hi does somebody know software for editing FLAC files? So I just want to cut some pieces out of the file (for example silence in front of a recording) Uncompress the file, run wavbreaker on it, use wavmerge as necessary, recompress. -- avuton -- Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell. ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: compressing more with traditional compression algorithm
Hi, I was wondering if it's possible to compress encoded FLAC files even more using a traditional compression algorithm like zip, rar, ... or won't you get any smaller files using such an algorithm by applying it on the encoded FLAC files? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [Flac] FLAC: getting compression level using metaflac
Why isn't the compression level added in a metadata block by the flac encoder itself (just like the encoder version)? In this way all programs that read the file can see what compression level was used. thx 2007/7/4, Scot Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: This has been asked many times. The answer is no. I suggest saving the compression level into a tag for future reference, but that won't help you with files you get from unknown locations. -- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Harry Sack *Sent:* Wednesday, July 04, 2007 7:14 AM *To:* flac@xiph.org *Subject:* [Flac] FLAC: getting compression level using metaflac Hi FLAC list! I have a question (maybe a strange one) about getting the compression level (0-8) using metaflac. So I want to know for a given FLAC file what compression level was used to compress that file. I tried using the --list option but this doesn't give any information about this. Is there a way to get the compression level of a given FLAC file using metaflac or another tool? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [Flac] including images
2007/7/3, Ralph Giles [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 07:18:17PM +0200, Harry Sack wrote: Can anybody tell me what the maximum filesize is for an image file to be included in a FLAC file? I'm just exploring this feature and I didn't find this yet The metadata block length field is 24 bits, so the upper limit is just a little less than 16 MB. At least in theory, I didn't test that. can Josh maybe confirm this? I'm planning to include some BMP images of album art in my FLAC files and those files can become big very quickly. So I hope somebody can tell me the upper limit for images, so I don't have problems with it when I exceed a certain filesize (without 'guessing' this limit). Thanks in advance PS: Does anybody know why there are so little programs that actually support the viewing of embedded pictures? I only found 2 of them: Amarok in linux and foobar in windows. There's not really a standard (or rather there are several) for album art, and it still seems to be an advanced feature. Feel free to agitate, this is an area where the better metadata of the free formats is a real advantage. -r ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: getting compression level using metaflac
Hi FLAC list! I have a question (maybe a strange one) about getting the compression level (0-8) using metaflac. So I want to know for a given FLAC file what compression level was used to compress that file. I tried using the --list option but this doesn't give any information about this. Is there a way to get the compression level of a given FLAC file using metaflac or another tool? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] including images
hi, Can anybody tell me what the maximum filesize is for an image file to be included in a FLAC file? I'm just exploring this feature and I didn't find this yet PS: Does anybody know why there are so little programs that actually support the viewing of embedded pictures? I only found 2 of them: Amarok in linux and foobar in windows. thx in advance! ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [Flac-dev] FLAC: library for C#
2007/6/14, Josh Coalson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: --- Erik de Castro Lopo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Harry Sack wrote: Hi FLAC dev's list, I'm looking for a library for the C# language (Microsoft .Net Framework 2.0or higher) to play FLAC files and/or maybe do some other things like getting the file duration, file properties, ... of FLAC files. The library must preferably be free (open source is not required, but is always nice). Why not just build FLAC as a DLL and then call into the DLL from C#? Harry, if that is good enough, there are already pre-build DLLs with headers in the sourceforge download section. but aren't they C++ headers en lib's? I have no idea how I can include a C++ header in a C# project. It this even possible? thx Josh Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing. http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/index.php ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
[Flac-dev] FLAC: library for C#
Hi FLAC dev's list, I'm looking for a library for the C# language (Microsoft .Net Framework 2.0or higher) to play FLAC files and/or maybe do some other things like getting the file duration, file properties, ... of FLAC files. The library must preferably be free (open source is not required, but is always nice). I hope somebody can help me with this! thx Harry ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
Re: [Flac-dev] compression ratio
2007/5/14, Josh Coalson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: --- Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hi i was wondering if it's possible to tell me what the theoretical best compression ratio the flac encoder can do, because i was wondering what the future of flac will bring us. So this question is probably best addressed to Josh: can we suspect much better compression ratio in the future or is the encoder already at his *almost* peak compression level. I think you're talking about average compression ratio because it depends on the particular sample. to make significant improvements (3%) would require changes to the format that wouldn't work with older decoders, which I don't plan on ever doing. i think that's a very good decision! if you look at the comparison here: http://flac.sourceforge.net/comparison.html you will see that FLAC is already within 3-4% of the most aggresive codecs. so in the future we can expect mostly speed improvements for encoder/decoder? Thanks Josh Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games. http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
[Flac-dev] compression ratio
hi i was wondering if it's possible to tell me what the theoretical best compression ratio the flac encoder can do, because i was wondering what the future of flac will bring us. So this question is probably best addressed to Josh: can we suspect much better compression ratio in the future or is the encoder already at his *almost* peak compression level. thx in advance! ___ Flac-dev mailing list Flac-dev@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac-dev
[Flac] encoding 22 kHz
hi, is it possible to encode 16 bit, 22 kHz, stereo/mono WAV files to FLAC files or could there be a problem with the low frequency 22 kHz (lower then CD quality)? PS: I'm a FLAC beginner thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [Flac] FLAC: sending output to file
2007/4/18, Josh Coalson [EMAIL PROTECTED]: --- Harry Sack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'm using windows so I know the wildcard support for flac is broken. That's why I use this command to encode a whole directory of WAV-files to FLAC-files in a command prompt: for %1 in (*.wav) do flac -V --best %1 This command is fully working Now I want to write the flac output to a file, so I can open this file later. I tried to add outputfile.txt to the command like this: for %1 in (*.wav) do flac -V --best %1 outputfile.txt But this doesn't work. using only captures stdout, but flac messages go to stderr, so you need to do for %1 in (*.wav) do flac -V --best %1 2 outputfile.txt this is true for cmd.exe as well as other unixy shells like bash. not sure if it works for command.com though. thanks a lot, it works! I was also wondering if writing everything to a file can slow down the FLAC encoding or is it as fast as writing everything to a command window? I was wondering if you know where I can find more information about the '2' operator for the windows command line? I don't find anything about it (I usually don't use the command line). Where did you find information about it? thx in advance! Josh __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: re-encode
hi, is it possible to re-encode an existing FLAC file by using the FLAC file itself as input to the encoder like this: flac -V --best inputfile.flac OR do you have decode it to WAV first? thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: data integrity checks
hi, are there some data integrity checks I can do on a downloaded FLAC file? If yes, can you give me the command line options/other software I need for this? I want to do some tests on downloaded files to check if they are corrupted after downloading thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: data integrity checks
hi, are there some data integrity checks I can do on a downloaded FLAC file? If yes, can you give me the command line options/other software I need for this? I want to do some tests on downloaded files to check if they are corrupted after downloading thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: data integrity checks
hi, are there some data integrity checks I can do on a downloaded FLAC file? If yes, can you give me the command line options/other software I need for this? I want to do some tests on downloaded files to check if they are corrupted after downloading thx ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [Flac] FLAC: track and album gain?
2007/4/1, Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Those are Replay Gain elements. Please check on Wikipedia or Hydrogenaudio for more information on RG. In short, they are values to normalize in a lossless way the audio volume. Hi, But how can this be possibly lossless? You change the volume of the audio tracks, so isn't this lossy or does the actual volume of a track isn't considered as audio quality? thanks in advance PS: I'm a beginner, so it could be a stupid question! -Ivo ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
Re: [Flac] FLAC: FLAC T-shirt
Hi, Is there anybody who knows where +I can find a picture on the Internet about the FLAC t-shirt? I wanted to make one myself just for personal use and I would like to see how the original looked. thanks in advance! 2007/3/29, Mark Rudholm [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Harry Sack wrote: Hi, I found some messages on the Internet there was a FLAC T-shirt. Is this T-shirt still available, because I'm really interested. If it is, where can it be ordered? (Josh will probably answer this question) I have a FLAC t-shirt, now I want a FLAC Jacket :-) -Mark ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: recommended compression
Hi, Why is -5 the recommended compression for the FLAC encoder? So my question is: why is a lower compression recommended over a higher compression (-8)? What factors make -5 the recommended one, even if the compression is lower then the -8 option? I hope somebody can explain this thanks in advance! ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: 99% complete message?
Hi, I tried to encode a WAV file to FLAC. But then I get a strange message: 99% complete. You can see the details below: 12 - In My Eyes (Radio Edit).wav: 99% complete, ratio=0,67412 - In My Eyes (Radi o Edit).wav: WARNING: skipping unknown sub-chunk 'LIST' 12 - In My Eyes (Radio Edit).wav: Verify OK, wrote 25090527 bytes, ratio=0,670 I have encoded the file using 'flac -V --best' using the flac command line tool. Can somebody explain me please what the 99% complete message means? Does this mean there were errors or what is the meaning of it? I can see the 'Verify OK' message but still flac tells me it's 99% complete. I don't understand what's happening here ... thanks in advance! ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: decoding to WAV in the future
Hi, I'm a FLAC beginner and I had a question. Suppose I encode my whole CD collection now in the FLAC format, using the FLAC encoder version 1.1.4 (the most recent one at this time). Will I still be able to decode all FLAC files to WAV files in the future using the latest FLAC decoder, when for example version 2.0 of FLAC (or a later version) is released or is it possible that at some point in the future you can't decode older FLAC files anymore with the latest FLAC decoder? So basically my question is: can you always decode ANY FLAC file, no mather what FLAC encoder version you have used to encode it, by using ANY other newer FLAC decoder that still has to be released in the future? I was hoping the main developer Josh Coalson could confirm this, because it's an important point for people who like to store their CD collection in the FLAC format! thanks in advance! ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: getting FLAC encoder version
Hi, I want to encode my CD collection using the FLAC encoder. I was wondering if you can see the FLAC encoder version number (e.g. 1.1.4.) in the encoded files in some way. Does the encoder store the FLAC encoder version number in the encoded files somewhere? I could store this version number in the comment tag myself when I encode the files, but I was wondering if it's stored automatically somewhere in the flac file. I ask this because I later want to check my files for the version number and if there is a new FLAC encoder I can re-encode the files with a version number smaller then the version number of the new updated encoder. thanks in advance! ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: FLAC T-shirt
Hi, I found some messages on the Internet there was a FLAC T-shirt. Is this T-shirt still available, because I'm really interested. If it is, where can it be ordered? thanks in advance! ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
[Flac] FLAC: specifying all files with extension .WAV
Hi, I want to use the flac encoder (in commandline mode) and I specify this command to encode all .WAV files in the current directory: N:\WAVflac -V --best -- *.wav flac 1.1.4, Copyright (C) 2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007 Josh Coalson flac comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions. Type `flac' for details. ERROR: can't open input file *.wav: Invalid argument What is wrong in my syntax or how can I specify to encode all *.wav files in the current directory (I'm using windows)? I remember that typing 'flac --best *wav' DID work in linux, why doesn't it work in windows? thanks ___ Flac mailing list Flac@xiph.org http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/flac
