Re: how to digitize a sizable CD collection using fedora?
On 20180204 06:57, Ed Greshko wrote:
On 02/04/18 22:45, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
i just did a quick test with abcde, ripping a CD to flac both with
and without the "-1" option (diff being ripping to a single FLAC file
versus individual FLAC files). the difference in final, total size is
negligible, both directories around 267M.
is there any benefit to one strategy or the other? i assume that i
can rip a CD to a single FLAC file and, subsequently, break it into
pieces later when i decide how i want to organize CDs and individual
songs.
I'd go with one file per track as opposed to one file per CD.
The breaking into pieces later on seems like more work. Besides, on almost any
CD
there will be one or two tracks that aren't of interest even if the artist is a
favorite.
BoBW - one folder per CD and one file per track.
{^_^}
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to digitize a sizable CD collection using fedora?
On 02/04/2018 09:45 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > ... snip ... > > On Sun, 4 Feb 2018, David King wrote: > >> On 02/03/2018 05:03 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >>> for now, i was thinking of ripping just to .flac since that's >>> lossless and i can always decide later what further format to rip >>> to in order to save space. does that make sense? i just want to >>> avoid having to go back and rip everything all over again. >>> >> That's exactly what I did five years ago, ripped all my CDs to FLAC >> using the abcde tool... > i just did a quick test with abcde, ripping a CD to flac both with > and without the "-1" option (diff being ripping to a single FLAC file > versus individual FLAC files). the difference in final, total size is > negligible, both directories around 267M. > > is there any benefit to one strategy or the other? i assume that i > can rip a CD to a single FLAC file and, subsequently, break it into > pieces later when i decide how i want to organize CDs and individual > songs. > > all i want for now is to not rip in such a way that i regret it > later when i discover i inadvertantly left out some useful > meta-information from each CD I went with individual files for each track because all of my use cases involved playing / working with individual songs, not whole CDs. I think the choice is mostly about how you plan to use the files after ripping them. As far as metadata goes, FreeDB or MusicBrainz provide backup sources for anything that you forget or lose. You haven't said whether or not you plan to dispose of the physical CDs after you've finished the rips. Keeping them around would be the ultimate backup source. -- David King d...@daveking.com ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to digitize a sizable CD collection using fedora?
On Sun, 4 Feb 2018 22:52:49 +0100 Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote: > On Sun, 04 Feb 2018 19:55:14 +1030 > Tim wrote: > > > > Well, if you're going to encode to an unusually high bit rate (that > > example did it at 320kB/s), I'm going to agree with you (that most > > people won't pick the difference). > > Well, that's the only way i found to get decent mp's. ... ;) ^^^ that should say "mp3's" ... -- Wolfgang Pfeiffer ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to digitize a sizable CD collection using fedora?
On Sun, 04 Feb 2018 19:55:14 +1030
Tim wrote:
> Allegedly, on or about 4 February 2018, Wolfgang Pfeiffer sent:
> > it's definitely true that with fine tools you can encode to mp3's
> > with a quality so high that for me at least it's difficult to find a
> > difference to the wav's they were encoded from, even with decent
> > stereo equipment. Also true, I'm old, so I might have ruined ears
> > enough to be unable to hear differences where they actually are.
> >
> > Easy test: try this in a dir with wav's, and the command below will
> > (should) code them to mp3's. With the resulting mp3's I'd bet
> > anyone will have difficulties to find a remarkable difference
> > between the wav's and the mp3's ...
> >
> > for f in *.wav; do ffmpeg -i "$f" -codec:a libmp3lame -qscale:a 0
> > "${f/%wav/mp3}"; done
>
> Well, if you're going to encode to an unusually high bit rate (that
> example did it at 320kB/s), I'm going to agree with you (that most
> people won't pick the difference).
Well, that's the only way i found to get decent mp's. ... ;)
>
> However, I find most people encode MP3s to a much lower bitrate, where
> I can hear burbles, squeaks and squealies, and the quieter nuances of
> some music disappears completely.
If you look at the files you seem to have encoded with the oneliner
from my prev. message (with "mediainfo" for example) you should see
that the mp3's have variable bit rate. That's, IINM, and hopefully, one
way to keep silent parts of a song existent and silent, and the louder
ones just as loud as they are.
> There's also a number of old, and
> not very good, codecs around, to which I notice that treble seems to be
> lacking. But it's the added noises that I particularly notice and
> dislike.
>
> One thing I notice with MP3 encoding that I can give it a wave with
> specific lead-in and lead-out time, and the encoded file is missing
> that (screwing up audio comprised of multiple files). Sometimes to the
> point where it's actually slightly cutting off the start of the audio.
> Whatever Audacity was doing behind the scenes tended to do that a lot.
I don't use Audacity for reencoding of existing files. I do that with
ffmpeg. Most of the time. And it just works - although it's hard at
times to find the right switches to get it done.
I added a few notes to my git repo how fading in/out of videos/audio
files, can be done with that tool. Look for "afade" in man ffmpeg-all
and in the notes I uploaded.
These notes are simply taken from what I write down often when finding
what worked on Linux, or Windows. They're mostly unedited, just
commands to use, with a few comments added - definitely no How-To ...
https://github.com/wlfgp/notes/blob/master/ffmpeg.txt
Clicking the "Raw' button on that page might give better
readability ...
HTH,
Regards
--
Wolfgang Pfeiffer
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: Permission Problems on NAS
On 02/04/2018 12:02 PM, Robert McBroom wrote: about transfer of the permissions on the files. However, createrepo gets into trouble and gives errors of the form C_CREATEREPOLIB: Warning: Cannot copy Packages/repodata/1f3b3f3f1e6f83cd3ce15c483203d0233352bef2c1fb9bdc84cf264c24637984-other.sqlite.bz2 -> Packages/.repodata/1f3b3f3f1e6f83cd3ce15c483203d0233352bef2c1fb9bdc84cf264c24637984-other.sqlite.bz2: cp: preserving permissions for ?Packages/.repodata/1f3b3f3f1e6f83cd3ce15c483203d0233352bef2c1fb9bdc84cf264c24637984-other.sqlite.bz2?: Permission denied : Child process exited with code 1 I would suggest running createrepo with strace to find out exactly which operation is failing. strace -s200 -f -o /tmp/createrepo.trace createrepo . This will create a lot of output in the file /tmp/createrepo.trace. Search through it for the "Cannot copy" text and somewhere before that should be the failing syscall. If you can't find it, then upload the trace file somewhere and I'll look at it. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Permission Problems on NAS
For years I've kept a local repo on NAS so that I can update several systems without having to download everything for each one. The drives on the NAS are formatted as ntfs for communication with Win systems. Now I'm getting all kinds of file attributes problems with rsync transferring the files from the dnf updates directory to the packages file on the NAS. "find . -print|cpio ---" still works and appropriately transfers the new files with their attributes although with complaints about transfer of the permissions on the files. However, createrepo gets into trouble and gives errors of the form C_CREATEREPOLIB: Warning: Cannot copy Packages/repodata/1f3b3f3f1e6f83cd3ce15c483203d0233352bef2c1fb9bdc84cf264c24637984-other.sqlite.bz2 -> Packages/.repodata/1f3b3f3f1e6f83cd3ce15c483203d0233352bef2c1fb9bdc84cf264c24637984-other.sqlite.bz2: cp: preserving permissions for ?Packages/.repodata/1f3b3f3f1e6f83cd3ce15c483203d0233352bef2c1fb9bdc84cf264c24637984-other.sqlite.bz2?: Permission denied : Child process exited with code 1 C_CREATEREPOLIB: Warning: Cannot copy Packages/repodata/3ab748ea9b0272e92fe69078cf2dfc11a728656f1b6a4ca0a61a861e17c89b64-filelists.xml.gz -> Packages/.repodata/3ab748ea9b0272e92fe69078cf2dfc11a728656f1b6a4ca0a61a861e17c89b64-filelists.xml.gz: cp: preserving permissions for ?Packages/.repodata/3ab748ea9b0272e92fe69078cf2dfc11a728656f1b6a4ca0a61a861e17c89b64-filelists.xml.gz?: Permission denied : Child process exited with code 1 C_CREATEREPOLIB: Warning: Cannot copy Packages/repodata/4da1215cadf7eca76485c8e9ddf17ba687f6ade39b36a75eea40315f344e4663-filelists.sqlite.bz2 -> Packages/.repodata/4da1215cadf7eca76485c8e9ddf17ba687f6ade39b36a75eea40315f344e4663-filelists.sqlite.bz2: cp: preserving permissions for ?Packages/.repodata/4da1215cadf7eca76485c8e9ddf17ba687f6ade39b36a75eea40315f344e4663-filelists.sqlite.bz2?: Permission denied : Child process exited with code 1 Makes no difference whether the repodata and .repodata directories pre-exist or not. The NAS local repo is not usable. The files can be migrated to a local system drive and a working repo created. Totally defeating the idea of having a single set of files usable from multiple systems. ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: What is this gibberish?
Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On 02/04/2018 08:34 AM, Todd Zullinger wrote: > >> The problem wasn't that it was silent. It was that it was a >> long(ish)-running process that was not suited to run as a >> scriptlet. It's better done via cron or as it is now as a >> transient systemd-run service. > And does this actually work? > > I recently was facing situations where this mandb stuff hit midst of > shutdown, when all mounted files already where unmounted, delaying shutdowns > be some 10-15mins. > > I haven't investigated, but I was inclined to blame systemd's unreliabily > and lack of robustness ;) I'm certainly not here to defend systemd's use for seemingly everything. :) All I care about in this situation is quieting the useless and confusing output from the man-db file trigger scriptlet's use of systemd-run. Doing that is a good step and doesn't interfere at all with subsequent work to improve the output from rpm/dnf while handling these transaction triggers, scriptlets, etc. >> Anyway, I think the current output is unintentional. > I think, the output needs to be more verbose and consider the current output > to be non-helpful. It may well be better to have more defaults in the rpm transaction to alert the user when it's running triggers or something, but that is something which most likely needs to happen in rpm/dnf rather than in this particular scriptlet. What we have here is the output of a scriptlet calling: /usr/bin/systemd-run /usr/bin/systemctl start man-db-cache-update We're only getting systemd-run/systemctl output, which is of very dubious value (and that value only goes down as more scriptlets run via this method). Knowing that a file trigger was running the man-db scriptlet would be better, but that's a slightly different matter. -- Todd ~~ Ninety percent of everything is crap. -- Sturgeon's Law signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to digitize a sizable CD collection using fedora?
On 02/04/18 22:45, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > i just did a quick test with abcde, ripping a CD to flac both with > and without the "-1" option (diff being ripping to a single FLAC file > versus individual FLAC files). the difference in final, total size is > negligible, both directories around 267M. > > is there any benefit to one strategy or the other? i assume that i > can rip a CD to a single FLAC file and, subsequently, break it into > pieces later when i decide how i want to organize CDs and individual > songs. I'd go with one file per track as opposed to one file per CD. The breaking into pieces later on seems like more work. Besides, on almost any CD there will be one or two tracks that aren't of interest even if the artist is a favorite. -- A motto of mine is: When in doubt, try it out signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to digitize a sizable CD collection using fedora?
... snip ... On Sun, 4 Feb 2018, David King wrote: > On 02/03/2018 05:03 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > for now, i was thinking of ripping just to .flac since that's > > lossless and i can always decide later what further format to rip > > to in order to save space. does that make sense? i just want to > > avoid having to go back and rip everything all over again. > > > That's exactly what I did five years ago, ripped all my CDs to FLAC > using the abcde tool... i just did a quick test with abcde, ripping a CD to flac both with and without the "-1" option (diff being ripping to a single FLAC file versus individual FLAC files). the difference in final, total size is negligible, both directories around 267M. is there any benefit to one strategy or the other? i assume that i can rip a CD to a single FLAC file and, subsequently, break it into pieces later when i decide how i want to organize CDs and individual songs. all i want for now is to not rip in such a way that i regret it later when i discover i inadvertantly left out some useful meta-information from each CD. so for now, i'm looking at just, one CD at a time: $ abcde -1 -o flac am i overlooking anything? i can start the process of ripping several hundred CDs, knowing that, over time, i'll figure out more explicitly how i want to manage that content, and not having to start all over because i didn't do it properly the first time. rday ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to digitize a sizable CD collection using fedora?
On 02/03/2018 05:03 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Sat, 3 Feb 2018, Jon LaBadie wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 02, 2018 at 05:29:40PM -0500, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >>> one of my new year's resolutions was to digitize several hundred >>> music CDs in preparation for figuring out what system to use in the >>> domicile to play them, but regardless of how i decide to eventually >>> play these CDs, i'm looking for recommendations for how to rip them to >>> hard drive before i decide how i will end up using them. >>> >>> given the cheapness of hard drives (and that i have a QNAP NAS >>> anyway), i don't really care about disk usage, so i figured on ripping >>> all of those CDs using (lossless) FLAC format, and i can decide down >>> the road whether to convert them to a different format to save on >>> space. >>> >>> in short, any recommendations on simply ripping all these CDs to >>> hard drive, while having no idea what i will eventually use to play >>> them? >> I only had about 60 CDs to rip, but like you was uncertain about >> format. >> >> I used "abcde" which let me save .wav, .flac, .oog, and .mp3 in 1 >> run. > for now, i was thinking of ripping just to .flac since that's > lossless and i can always decide later what further format to rip to > in order to save space. does that make sense? i just want to avoid > having to go back and rip everything all over again. > > rday That's exactly what I did five years ago, ripped all my CDs to FLAC using the abcde tool. After that I wrote scripts to put subsets of my collection in various formats onto disks for my cars, onto my phone, etc. I use MPD to drive both an FM transmitter in my house and a stream to the internet playing random songs from my collection. Recently I wrote an Alexa skill that does the same thing for the Echo devices in my house, letting me ask the Echo to play specific artists or albums from my collection. (Originally I uploaded everything into Amazon Music for this purpose but now they've announced that they'll be discontinuing the part of their service which supports large collections like mine.) So I really like the idea of using FLAC as the base and then doing whatever conversions are needed to suit the particular device or service that I'm using the music with. It might be true that I'm incapable of hearing the difference in quality but given that disk space is so cheap these days, the space I'd save by using some compressed format really isn't important. I've got 14,954 songs in 292GB. -- David King d...@daveking.com ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to digitize a sizable CD collection using fedora?
Allegedly, on or about 4 February 2018, Wolfgang Pfeiffer sent:
> it's definitely true that with fine tools you can encode to mp3's
> with a quality so high that for me at least it's difficult to find a
> difference to the wav's they were encoded from, even with decent
> stereo equipment. Also true, I'm old, so I might have ruined ears
> enough to be unable to hear differences where they actually are.
>
> Easy test: try this in a dir with wav's, and the command below will
> (should) code them to mp3's. With the resulting mp3's I'd bet
> anyone will have difficulties to find a remarkable difference
> between the wav's and the mp3's ...
>
> for f in *.wav; do ffmpeg -i "$f" -codec:a libmp3lame -qscale:a 0
> "${f/%wav/mp3}"; done
Well, if you're going to encode to an unusually high bit rate (that
example did it at 320kB/s), I'm going to agree with you (that most
people won't pick the difference).
However, I find most people encode MP3s to a much lower bitrate, where
I can hear burbles, squeaks and squealies, and the quieter nuances of
some music disappears completely. There's also a number of old, and
not very good, codecs around, to which I notice that treble seems to be
lacking. But it's the added noises that I particularly notice and
dislike.
One thing I notice with MP3 encoding that I can give it a wave with
specific lead-in and lead-out time, and the encoded file is missing
that (screwing up audio comprised of multiple files). Sometimes to the
point where it's actually slightly cutting off the start of the audio.
Whatever Audacity was doing behind the scenes tended to do that a lot.
--
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 4.14.14-200.fc26.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Jan 19 13:27:06 UTC 2018 x86_64
Boilerplate: All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted.
There is no point trying to privately email me, I only get to see
the messages posted to the mailing list.
The internet, your opportunity to learn from other peoples' mistakes.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: how to digitize a sizable CD collection using fedora?
On Sun, 4 Feb 2018, Ed Greshko wrote: ... snip ... > What makes sense to me is to first select a few individual tracks > with different types of music. For example, if you have classical, > pick a few with quiet movements with only strings, those with lots > of highs, etc. Then record and listen to all of those in various > formats. Even better if you have have someone play them for you in > different formats to see if you can tell the difference. > > I've found that folks have a tendency to overvalue lossless formats > but in fact their ears aren't up to the task... my initial plan was to rip them all to FLAC, simply because the major investment here is the time doing all the ripping, at which point i'll have them all in lossless FLAC format and i can decide down the road if i want to do any further conversion, which i assume i should be able to do with a simple shell script. or given that disk space really isn't an issue these days, i can just leave them in FLAC format. in any event, for now, i just want to avoid doing hours of ripping, only to have to go back later for some reason and do it all over again, and FLAC seems like the safest bet. rday ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Re: What is this gibberish?
On 02/04/2018 08:34 AM, Todd Zullinger wrote: The problem wasn't that it was silent. It was that it was a long(ish)-running process that was not suited to run as a scriptlet. It's better done via cron or as it is now as a transient systemd-run service. And does this actually work? I recently was facing situations where this mandb stuff hit midst of shutdown, when all mounted files already where unmounted, delaying shutdowns be some 10-15mins. I haven't investigated, but I was inclined to blame systemd's unreliabily and lack of robustness ;) Anyway, I think the current output is unintentional. I think, the output needs to be more verbose and consider the current output to be non-helpful. Ralf ___ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
