cdrdao - gaps between tracks problem
in [Linux Help]
|
Prev: A spanked spammer...
Next: nvidia geforce 9500 dualview
From: unruh on 23 May 2010 18:21 On 2010-05-23, Joerg Schilling <js(a)cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote: > In article <slrnhvio91.vhn.unruh(a)wormhole.physics.ubc.ca>, > unruh <unruh(a)wormhole.physics.ubc.ca> wrote: > >>> I am not sure about how your text is related to that. >> >>It is not at all. It was simply a statement as to why I still like >>cdrdao/gcdmaster. As usual, there are many tools in Linux and some have >>advantages in certain situations. I will agree that cdrtools is more >>robust, handles a far wider range of situations, etc. Unfortunately >>there are certain things which it does not do as well. That is probably >>largely due to the absense of certain gui based tools. > > If you believe you can't do something with cdrtools that truely works with > cdrdao, this is considered a bug/missing feature in cdrtools. You should > immediately report such situations. As I said, what I find I like about cdrdao is that I can assemble a CD from a whole bunch of .wav files, picking out bits and pieces of those files to assemble them into a CD, all without having to create new .wav files as with audacity) and without the original files being affected at all. > > Do you know that there is XCDRoast that allows you to easily copy CDs from a > GUI? XCDRoast even supports to copy hidden audio tracks (before track #1). I have used xcdroast, and as far as I know I can only assemble complete ..wav files into the CD. I cannot pick out pieces ( 4 min from this .wav file, then 2 min from that one, then back to the first for another minute of music from earlier in the file, etc) without having to assemble a new .wav file. > >>> The trick why cdrtools is able to do things that other programs can't do >>> is caused by the fact that cdrtools follow the basic ideas how sound engineers >>> create the structure of a recording. In this structure, the beginning of a track >>> is Index 1 of Track "n" and the end of the same track is the end of Index 0 of >>> Track "n+1". Cdda2wav extracts the data this way into files and writes the >>> related meta-data information into the *.inf files. Cdrecord understands this >>> information and is able to reconstruct the same structure. >>> >>> Cdrtools is the only tool I am aware of that allows to combine tracks from >>> different disks without the need of physically editing wav files. >> >>No, cdrdao does that easily. I do it all the time. >>cdrdao never edits .wav files. > > I am very sure that you are mistaken here. Did you ever try to create a new CD > from single tracks from different source CDs? This is where other programs > usually fail without editing the .wav files. I did have to read in the CD to make .wav files, but then I can pick tiny pieces from each of the the tracks-- from anywhere in the track. And I did not have to edit the .wav files at all. They are unchanged. That is the strength of cdrdao/gcdmaster. I know that you do not like their non-standard .toc file, but it really does work well for stuff like the above. > > > >
From: unruh on 23 May 2010 18:26 On 2010-05-23, Mike Jones <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote: > Responding to Joerg Schilling: > >> In article <pan.2010.05.21.22.13.12(a)dasteem.invalid>, Mike Jones >> <luck(a)dasteem.invalid> wrote: >> >>>> Dude, I just told you wnat to do (maybe you got confused because your >>>> mailer chopped up the line) >>> >>> >>>IT DIDN'T WORK. Ok? >>> >>>cdda2wav -vall cddb=0 -B cdrecord -v -sao -useinfo *.wav >>> >>>=[FAIL] (errors about device) >> >> Your fail: you did not give any information > > > Some. If you want a full report, say so. > > >> >>>cdda2wav -D /dev/dvd -vall cddb=0 -B cdrecord -v -sao -useinfo *.wav >>> >>>=[FAIL] (hangs,doing nothing) >> >> Your fail: you did not give any information > > > Some. If you want a full report, say so. > > >> >>>cdda2wav -vall cddb=0 -B cdrecord device=5,0,0 -v -sao -useinfo *.wav >>> >>>=[FAIL] (errors about device) >> >> Your fail: you did not give any information > > > Some. If you want a full report, say so. > > >> Are you interested in help? > > > I'm getting a distinct feeling you're pissed of because I'm struggling > with something close to your heart here. Be sure, I am indeed struggling > with this, and its taken me this long come to the conclusion I have > faulty hardware or a screw up somewhere else on my system No, all of us are pissed because you seem determined to provide as little information as possible, while still asking for help. Why in the world do you not give full report, instead of saying you will do so if he asks. YOU are the one who wants help (well, all of us doubt it actually) but you keep acting as if you are doing us a favour by giving information. > > I'm not looking for conflict here, so if you could take that on board we > might do a little better with the communication, ok? > > So, would you like me to run through everything I've tried, with full > reports and outputs? OF COURSE. You want help, the only way we can give it is if you give us information. >
From: jr4412 on 23 May 2010 18:58 Mike, > Adding device direction as per man page fixed this, but then I got hangs. is your machine busy with other stuff (print/db/web servers, other users)?? obviously, it helps to keep usage low whilst copying; quick checks with (for eaxmple) 'uptime' and 'netstat -untapvee' will give you an idea. also, apologies for suspecting trolling, sorry.
From: Mike Jones on 24 May 2010 05:38 Responding to jr4412: > Mike, > >> Adding device direction as per man page fixed this, but then I got >> hangs. > > is your machine busy with other stuff (print/db/web servers, other > users)?? obviously, it helps to keep usage low whilst copying; quick > checks with (for eaxmple) 'uptime' and 'netstat -untapvee' will give you > an idea. > > also, apologies for suspecting trolling, sorry. Easy to do I suppose. It just takes one moment... Anyhoo, I think it would be a goodidea to run some process checking on this, as I'm still wondering if I have a hardware glitch. Checklist... * Can others do this? = yes * Can I do this = no * Same commands? = yes * Same configs? = unknown * Hardware glitch = possible Testing time. First up though, a "did this and got that" report, coming next. -- *=( http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/ *=( For all your UK news needs.
From: Mike Jones on 24 May 2010 05:41
Responding to unruh: >>>>=[FAIL] (errors about device) >>> >>> Your fail: you did not give any information >> >> >> Some. If you want a full report, say so. >> >> >>> Are you interested in help? >> >> >> I'm getting a distinct feeling you're pissed of because I'm struggling >> with something close to your heart here. Be sure, I am indeed >> struggling with this, and its taken me this long come to the conclusion >> I have faulty hardware or a screw up somewhere else on my system > > No, all of us are pissed because you seem determined to provide as > little information as possible, while still asking for help. Will you kindly /resist/ pouring more fuel on this? YOU'RE NOT HELPING! Ta. -- *=( http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/ *=( For all your UK news needs. |