Thread indefinitely shut down. My apologies.

Ripping albums using EAC to a lossless format is a great initiative.

But can't you just sharing instead of those egoist trades ?
It is you choice, but this isn't the right place then.
This a download links forum for anime and games.
Also, for your requests, there is also a request forum, you didn't saw it ? http://forums.ffshrine.org/forumdisplay.php?f=70

For trading : http://dcplusplus.sourceforge.net/

Good luck.

Ripping albums using EAC to a lossless format is a great initiative.

But can't you just sharing instead of those egoist trades ?
It is you choice, but this isn't the right place then.
This a download links forum for anime and games.
Also, for your requests, there is also a request forum, you didn't saw it ? http://forums.ffshrine.org/forumdisplay.php?f=70

For trading : http://dcplusplus.sourceforge.net/

Good luck.

Egoist is abit harsh, because that's one of my least prevalent personality characteristics. I know trading isn't ideal for everyone; but the things I want in the format I've detailed are very hard to come by unless you force a kind of rule upon people. Then again, I felt abit bad making this a trading thread from the get go. I kind of felt, in simple terms, 'mean' about it. So I guess I'll change it. I'll share everything free of charge =)

Sorry, sometimes I am sticky.

Welcome on the forum :)

Uploading '[2008.07.16] Versailles - Noble ~ Vampires Chronicle [FLAC] [SASCD-38]'. Just because it's J-rock and it's probably going to get downloaded a fair bit. I'll upload its DVD accompaniment '[2008.07.16] Versailles - Noble ~ Vampires Chronicle [DVD5 + MDS] [SASCD-38]' afterward.

I doubt you will find any. Not a lot people use lossless. They are comfortable with using lossy files like mp3.

* The track quality reported in the log file must return 100.00%
I think I am going to call you out on this since I've been using EAC to rip my constantly growing CD collection for a couple of years now and it's nearly impossible to get a 100% on track quality for an entire disc. Not receiving a 100% on track quality does not necessarily mean that there's anything wrong with the track that was extracted, either. I'm pretty sure it just means that it had to put a little more effort into it.

I doubt you will find any. Not a lot people use lossless. They are comfortable with using lossy files like mp3.

No need for unnecessary words of discouragement. I'm aware lossless isn't so popular.

I think I am going to call you out on this since I've been using EAC to rip my constantly growing CD collection for a couple of years now and it's nearly impossible to get a 100% on track quality for an entire disc. Not receiving a 100% on track quality does not necessarily mean that there's anything wrong with the track that was extracted, either. I'm pretty sure it just means that it had to put a little more effort into it.

I'll call you out on the fact that I have numerous things that've returned 100.00%, namely almost everything I've purchased. I require 100.00% for my peace of mind...that's just my opinion.

I'll call you out on the fact that I have numerous things that've returned 100.00%, namely almost everything I've purchased. I require 100.00% for my peace of mind...that's just my opinion.
Again, you're placing emphasis on a number that really has no significant value as far as the end results are concerned. You are/were just being overly paranoid and slightly hypocritical with that 100% track quality rule.

Again, you're placing emphasis on a number that really has no significant value as far as the end results are concerned. You are/were just being overly paranoid and slightly hypocritical with that 100% track quality rule.

It's simply my preference. I'd like to ask, if the number has no significant value, even if it's as far as the end result is concerned (which I assume means the quality my ear's picking up), then why is it there; I understand that whatever error it tried to correct is utterly inaudible, and I accept that, but that's not my point. 100.00% exists because it's very nature is that it's above 99.9%, thus making it superior in some small shape or form. My perfectionist mentality which yes, I admit isn't necessarily practical, requires I see a genuine 100.00%. Having said that, some are content with 99.9% or less in some cases, and I'm not bagging them at all for that; they can be as they wish, and I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm just saying it's not my way of doing things. I'd understand having 'picky' or 'impratical' attributed to me when it comes to this, because both things would be true of me; but paranoid takes it a step further, not to mention hypocritical. I'm not trying to say in any way, shape or form that your collection is obsolete either. I reiterate once more that this is simply my preference. If you have lossless to share that doesn't comply with my personal standard (which again isn't everyone's standard), then alright, you may share it here, if indeed you intend to share. Alot of other people should be thrilled with your input if there will be one. Other than that, feel free to download anything I put up, or request something if you'd like =)

It's simply my preference. I'd like to ask, if the number has no significant value, even if it's as far as the end result is concerned (which I assume means the quality my ear's picking up), then why is it there; I understand that whatever error it tried to correct is utterly inaudible, and I accept that, but that's not my point. 100.00% exists because it's very nature is that it's above 99.9%, thus making it superior in some small shape or form. My perfectionist mentality which yes, I admit isn't necessarily practical, requires I see a genuine 100.00%. Having said that, some are content with 99.9% or less in some cases, and I'm not bagging them at all for that; they can be as they wish, and I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm just saying it's not my way of doing things. I'd understand having 'picky' or 'impratical' attributed to me when it comes to this, because both things would be true of me; but paranoid takes it a step further, not to mention hypocritical. I'm not trying to say in any way, shape or form that your collection is obsolete either. I reiterate once more that this is simply my preference. If you have lossless to share that doesn't comply with my personal standard (which again isn't everyone's standard), then alright, you may share it here, if indeed you intend to share. Alot of other people should be thrilled with your input if there will be one. Other than that, feel free to download anything I put up, or request something if you'd like =)

I believe the reason that number is there is to let the user know how often EAC had to re-read the same area on a track to get matching values. The end result should in theory still be a perfect copy of the CD, regardless of what the track quality ends up being. Though I understand that even in cases of "100%" on track quality, there could still be a flaw on the track. So, yeah, track quality does not mean as much as you'd like it to mean.

Anyway, the integrity of music files will most likely decrease over time, no matter how "perfect" they are at the beginning, even if it's just by a few inconsequential bits. I think even downloading music off the Internet invites the opportunity for some bits of information to get lost along the way. So, "perfection" is pretty hard to obtain and maintain, which is why I threw in the words "hypocritical" and "paranoid" with regards to this topic.

As for me contributing to a lossless topic, I would have to say that's unlikely for two major reasons:
1) Like someone else mentioned before, lossless music files aren't very popular here. Files take longer to download/upload, not many people have decent CD players that could take advantage of lossless files, and they're impractical for use on mp3 players.
2) I have some issues with sharing music, especially when it comes to individuals handing out lossless music files or soundtracks that are pretty easy to come by. However, I have been considering an .mp3 topic of my own, though I'm not sure I have the patience to set up all my soundtracks online.

I believe the reason that number is there is to let the user know how often EAC had to re-read the same area on a track to get matching values. The end result should in theory still be a perfect copy of the CD, regardless of what the track quality ends up being. Though I understand that even in cases of "100%" on track quality, there could still be a flaw on the track. So, yeah, track quality does not mean as much as you'd like it to mean.

I'm aware of the fact that even under 100.00%, there could be a flaw, but at that point, you can't really know, nor can you ask for more. I imagine 99.9% remotely suggests that there definitely could have been a flaw, whereas with 100.00%...well, you have to be perfectly content with that. I agree with you, but 100.00% was initially a rule solely for my piece and mind and my preferences with respect to my own collection, and perhaps to help out those who have the same deranged preferences I do.


Anyway, the integrity of music files will most likely decrease over time, no matter how "perfect" they are at the beginning, even if it's just by a few inconsequential bits. I think even downloading music off the Internet invites the opportunity for some bits of information to get lost along the way. So, "perfection" is pretty hard to obtain and maintain, which is why I threw in the words "hypocritical" and "paranoid" with regards to this topic.

I agree; it can indeed happen, and files can become corrupt, which is why I introduced the MD5 verification file rule. It assigns a specific code to the files, and if even one foreign bit is lost, corrupt, or altered, then the code won't match with the MD5 file. Then you'll know something's corrupted, unless I'm wrong there.


As for me contributing to a lossless topic, I would have to say that's unlikely for two major reasons:
1) Like someone else mentioned before, lossless music files aren't very popular here. Files take longer to download/upload, not many people have decent CD players that could take advantage of lossless files, and they're impractical for use on mp3 players.
2) I have some issues with sharing music, especially when it comes to individuals handing out lossless music files or soundtracks that are pretty easy to come by. However, I have been considering an .mp3 topic of my own, though I'm not sure I have the patience to set up all my soundtracks online.

Fair points indeed; and I thank you for your input. I agree it's unlikely, but I just think 'hey, it's worth a shot'. Additionally, with the original lossless file, one can fiddle around and make as many different encodes as they like to suit themselves and their preferences. Even if no one uploads anything, I'll just share what I have and people can mangle it as they like. At the very end of the day, I can still use all the links I upload (providing the file hosting service doesn't delete them) as a third mirror for all my stuff, aside from my external HD and physical media (dvd data discs), and so on. If you want to set up an mp3 topic, I'll contribute mp3's, or if you want, highly quality mp4 files.

Finally got round to finishing my first upload. The main post has been updated with the link as well.

Versailles - Noble ~ Vampires Chronicle [FLAC] [SASCD-38] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?qylnmdymz2e)
Released: 2008.07.16
Uploaded: 2008.10.25
Encode Format: FLAC

Download the text file there with the links within it. Better than directly linking to the site, and the site thus linking file downloads directly to this page and possibly deleting links >__<

Interesting thread. :)

I too am a big advocate for lossless rips of video game/anime music CDs, .log, .cue, ect. Granted, these are sometimes difficult to come across, but it's really a matter of how and where you look for them.

In the matter of track quality (100.00% > 99.99%), I believe that this question was asked on the EAC forums awhile ago and someone there answered the question by saying that 'there's really no difference in the quality of the rip but it's just the way in which EAC may display it in the log file'. To be sure that what I'm saying it correct, I'll look for the link when I return home and post it here, but I'm just saying what it is that I remember reading.

One good thing I can say about this is that, if you ever are to buy anymore video game music CDs, I can trust that you will provide quality, bit-by-bit replications of the original CDs. I look forward to hearing them. :D

I'll see if I have anything that meets up to your standards of quality, I've got to check the log file from the Super Mario Galaxy Original Sound Track Platinum Edition (2-disc) that I have. I doubt that I have anything that you're asking for in your list though. Sorry.

Come to think of it, I have some links to websites that you might find of interest. There's one website that I happened to stumble upon awhile ago that has a lot of J-Rock/J-Pop in lossless, then there's another site that has a lot of anime music in lossless, and yet some others that are good for video game music in lossless. I'll see if I can post them some time between tomorrow and... forever, :) bad memory sometimes gets the best of me. :(

Cya.

I'm aware of the fact that even under 100.00%, there could be a flaw, but at that point, you can't really know, nor can you ask for more. I imagine 99.9% remotely suggests that there definitely could have been a flaw, whereas with 100.00%...well, you have to be perfectly content with that. I agree with you, but 100.00% was initially a rule solely for my piece and mind and my preferences with respect to my own collection, and perhaps to help out those who have the same deranged preferences I do.



I agree; it can indeed happen, and files can become corrupt, which is why I introduced the MD5 verification file rule. It assigns a specific code to the files, and if even one foreign bit is lost, corrupt, or altered, then the code won't match with the MD5 file. Then you'll know something's corrupted, unless I'm wrong there.



Fair points indeed; and I thank you for your input. I agree it's unlikely, but I just think 'hey, it's worth a shot'. Additionally, with the original lossless file, one can fiddle around and make as many different encodes as they like to suit themselves and their preferences. Even if no one uploads anything, I'll just share what I have and people can mangle it as they like. At the very end of the day, I can still use all the links I upload (providing the file hosting service doesn't delete them) as a third mirror for all my stuff, aside from my external HD and physical media (dvd data discs), and so on. If you want to set up an mp3 topic, I'll contribute mp3's, or if you want, highly quality mp4 files.

So, what happens when the "perfection" of the audio files you have downloaded is comprimised? Would you just accept the minor imperfections or delete all the related files? It's bound to happen, no matter how careful you are. For the record, I have two external hard drives and my computer as my back-ups for my CDs.

As for MD5, I've heard of similar programs before, but checking for flaws on files can make someone [more] paranoid, especially once a flaw surfaces.

And if I were to create a sharing topic on this forum, it would solely be dedicated to versus fighting soundtracks, which my CD collection is mostly composed of nowadays. Well, I guess there could be a small Japanese rock/Japanse pop section at the bottom, but that would make for one weird topic title.

Moving onto your brief mention of mp4 files: I can honestly say that I've never considered another lossy format other than the ogg vorbis format. Though this was a while back when I had my original RPG/SRPG VGM collection and before other audio formats were made known. Anyway, I looked up mp4 audio files (mp4a) via Google, and while I was a bit confused at first (aac versus mp4a), I'm now starting to think that I may want to convert my lossless files into mp4a files in the near future. The only problem for me would be that my future mp3 player does not like the mp4a file extension, though it is partial to the aac one.

All in all, this topic is a bit of an eye opener for me as I may want to check some things on my end to make sure I'm not totally slacking off on my audio collection.

So, what happens when the "perfection" of the audio files you have downloaded is comprimised? Would you just accept the minor imperfections or delete all the related files? It's bound to happen, no matter how careful you are. For the record, I have two external hard drives and my computer as my back-ups for my CDs.

I would delete the files; that's just how I operate xD


As for MD5, I've heard of similar programs before, but checking for flaws on files can make someone [more] paranoid, especially once a flaw surfaces.

If you check the MD5 after every single transfer you make, you'll be able to identify exactly where the error was introduced, and you could then investigate as to the why.


All in all, this topic is a bit of an eye opener for me as I may want to check some things on my end to make sure I'm not totally slacking off on my audio collection.

I'm happy with your input though; it's never a bad thing to learn something new =)


In the matter of track quality (100.00% > 99.99%), I believe that this question was asked on the EAC forums awhile ago and someone there answered the question by saying that 'there's really no difference in the quality of the rip but it's just the way in which EAC may display it in the log file'. To be sure that what I'm saying it correct, I'll look for the link when I return home and post it here, but I'm just saying what it is that I remember reading.

I'd like to see the page, if that's alright =) Then again, I don't know why EAC wouldn't display it as 100.00 or as 99.9 if there wasn't a difference between the numbers, but that's just me I suppose.


One good thing I can say about this is that, if you ever are to buy anymore video game music CDs, I can trust that you will provide quality, bit-by-bit replications of the original CDs. I look forward to hearing them.

Definitely; I'll be happy to share them too. I've got the official Japanese releases of Guilty Gear X-2, and Guilty Gear X-2 Korean coming in the mail.


I doubt that I have anything that you're asking for in your list though. Sorry.

That's alright; I don't really expect alot of regular sharers to have those types of things, especially X Japan; it's quite obscure stuff.


There's one website that I happened to stumble upon awhile ago that has a lot of J-Rock/J-Pop in lossless, then there's another site that has a lot of anime music in lossless, and yet some others that are good for video game music in lossless.

I'd be very very happy if you could show me these sites =) If it saves me having to buy a CD, unseal it just for a copy, and then reselling it to get the money back to buy another sealed version (yes, I'm a collector), then I'd be VERY grateful!

Finished another one =)

X Japan - Rusty Nail [AMDM-6115] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?yzjm22qnojn)
Released: 1994.07.10
Uploaded: 2008.10.29
Encode Format: FLAC

Again, the link redirects to a txt file download; within it are the links and details.

I'll try to send those links for you tomorrow.

I actually need some help in finding a few other VGM albums in lossless, if you have any sources, wedsites, IRCs, I'd appreciate if you could share them. :)

And another one. I don't know what to upload really, but I'm just going with anything. If anyone wants something in particular from my list first, I'll upload it.

X - Silent Jealousy [SRDL-3317] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?nzdydzmty2y)
Released: 1991.07.01
Uploaded: 2008.11.01
Encode Format: FLAC

The link redirects to a txt file download; within it are the links and details.

I'll try to send those links for you tomorrow.

I actually need some help in finding a few other VGM albums in lossless, if you have any sources, wedsites, IRCs, I'd appreciate if you could share them. :)

If there's something we both really like, ie, I'm thinking Guilty Gear/Final Fantasy-ish, then I could possibly purchase and rip it myself. What are you looking for?

I hope that you enjoy the links that I sent you rusty_nail. :)


If there's something we both really like, ie, I'm thinking Guilty Gear/Final Fantasy-ish, then I could possibly purchase and rip it myself. What are you looking for?

Well... it's not really Final Fantasy-ish, but it is an OST that I've been requesting for awhile, and it sounds really good, to me anyway.

I'll post the info on it as well as a link where you can preview the entire soundtrack and see if you like it.

Shenmue Chapter 1 Yokosuka
- Click on image for info -
(http://vgmdb.net/album/595)
- Preview Soundtrack - (http://www.sound-test.org/soundtracks.php?do=preview&gameid=234)

There are others but it's this one especially that I'm interested in at the moment.

Shenmue Chapter 1 Yokosuka
- Click on image for info -
(http://vgmdb.net/album/595)
- Preview Soundtrack - (http://www.sound-test.org/soundtracks.php?do=preview&gameid=234)

There are others but it's this one especially that I'm interested in at the moment.

I haven't found this one yet, but I did find Shenmue Orchestra if that's on your list; APE format with CUE & LOG.

Currently uploading 'Guilty Gear XX - The Midnight Carnival'. Got it in the mail the other day, got 100.00% rips too =) I'll edit this post when I've finished uploading, but that should be in a few days atleast given the slowness of my upload line. Have ye patience xD

Currently uploading 'Guilty Gear XX - The Midnight Carnival'. Got it in the mail the other day, got 100.00% rips too =) I'll edit this post when I've finished uploading, but that should be in a few days atleast given the slowness of my upload line. Have ye patience xD

Thanks for this rusty_nail, I'm looking forward to the upload. :)
I'll soon be making a thread of soundtracks that I'm looking for in proper archival lossless, I'll send you a link if you'd like, you might even find some soundtracks in there that could be of interest to you (Will also provide streamed content for listening).

Cya. :)

Currently uploading 'Guilty Gear XX - The Midnight Carnival'. Got it in the mail the other day, got 100.00% rips too =) I'll edit this post when I've finished uploading, but that should be in a few days atleast given the slowness of my upload line. Have ye patience xD

There was an official soundtrack release for that Guilty Gear game? What's the catalog number on that? If you don't mind me asking, that is.

There was an official soundtrack release for that Guilty Gear game? What's the catalog number on that? If you don't mind me asking, that is.

SCDC-00191~2 =)

Oh, I already have that one, then. The "Midnight Carnival" label threw me off because I don't think that subtitle was added to the soundtrack, though I could be wrong. Thanks for clearing that up, anyway.

I have a minor request, though: Could you tell me the file size of that soundtrack? I'm doing a minor experiment with lossless audio file sizes in relation to scratches, different drives, different copies of the same soundtrack, and different audio programs.

Oh, I already have that one, then. The "Midnight Carnival" label threw me off because I don't think that subtitle was added to the soundtrack, though I could be wrong. Thanks for clearing that up, anyway.

I have a minor request, though: Could you tell me the file size of that soundtrack? I'm doing a minor experiment with lossless audio file sizes in relation to scratches, different drives, different copies of the same soundtrack, and different audio programs.

The file size of both uncompressed wavs? =)

Guilty Gear XX - The Midnight Carnival [SCDC-00191~2] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?zudjmyrwmum)
Released: 2002.07.23
Uploaded: 2008.11.09
Encode Format: FLAC

Excellence.

I've got the Valkyrie Profile OST completed, just sorting the txt file, and I've got Guilty Gear XX #Reload - The Midnight Carnival Korean Version on the way =)

Hey rusty_nail, very good uploads, I'm especially looking forward to the Valkrie Profiles OST. :D

In regards to the contents of your archives, they're excellent, :) there's just one more file you can add; an SFV (simple file verification) file. I use a program called hkSFV to add both MD5 and SFV files to my archives, it works via context menu.

I'm stuck on Wii-Net (Internet Channel) so I can't link to it right now, but if you do a Google search you should be able to find it quite easily (@ Download.com).

OK thanks again. :)

Hey rusty_nail, very good uploads, I'm especially looking forward to the Valkrie Profiles OST. :D

In regards to the contents of your archives, they're excellent, :) there's just one more file you can add; an SFV (simple file verification) file. I use a program called hkSFV to add both MD5 and SFV files to my archives, it works via context menu.

I'm stuck on Wii-Net (Internet Channel) so I can't link to it right now, but if you do a Google search you should be able to find it quite easily (@ Download.com).

OK thanks again. :)

Hey heeeey =) I would do SFV, but I've read that SFV is for smaller files, whereas MD5 is generally more effective for larger files? I didn't understand the difference so I looked it up and it told me that, to put it simply =) Other than that, I can up an SFV for you.

Valkyrie Profile - Lenneth (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?qqokoqzzmym)
Released: 2006.03.01
Uploaded: 2008.11.11
Encode Format: FLAC

One of my favorites =)

Sup rusty_nail.

Really the SFV file thing is no problem, I was just saying that, if you want, you could add that file to your archives for future uploads. Other then that, it's no problem by me, you're uploads are very satisfactory. :)

Thanks for all of the Valkrie Profile and Guilty Gear stuff, can't wait to get home so I can hear it. :D

* The track quality reported in the log file should ideally return 100.00%, or 99.9%. Anything less isn't adequate.


Interesting thread. :) In the matter of track quality (100.00% > 99.99%), I believe that this question was asked on the EAC forums awhile ago and someone there answered the question by saying that 'there's really no difference in the quality of the rip but it's just the way in which EAC may display it in the log file'. To be sure that what I'm saying it correct, I'll look for the link when I return home and post it here, but I'm just saying what it is that I remember reading.

OK rusty_nail, I found some info regarding this, sorry if it's a little late. :)
Question about EAC "quality" (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=6536)

So it's probably a better idea to request that "Copy & Test" is used so that you can compare CRCs. Identical CRCs = an identical copy of the disc/track (with the exception of improper read Offset correction).

.

The file size of both uncompressed wavs? =)

Yes, the uncompressed wav(s) size since I've come to realize that sometimes when FLAC-ing the same soundtrack more than once, the flac files come out at different sizes. Though when they were uncompressed, the wav files were the same size.

Anyway, in case anyone was curious, I've done two experiments in determining whether or not scratches, track quality results, and/or different CDs produce different file sizes when using EAC to rip any given soundtrack. The results were that two different CDs of the same exact soundtrack (One CD being brand new, the other CD being scratched) produced the exact same file size on my computer. With the first trial, I had ripped a soundtrack from a CD several months ago that was scratched, and just recently, ripped the same soundtrack from a different CD that was brand new (and thus no scratches). I, then, ripped the scratched CD again to see the track quality report, and as expected, there was a difference in the track qualities. For the second trial, I had also recently purchased two copies of the same soundtrack: One new and one used with scratches. Like the first trial, the results were that both copies produced the same exact file size on my computer with the track qualities once again being varied between the two result reports. My next trial will involve two scratched CDs and my fourth one will probably involve three CDs of the same soundtrack.

Yes, the uncompressed wav(s) size since I've come to realize that sometimes when FLAC-ing the same soundtrack more than once, the flac files come out at different sizes. Though when they were uncompressed, the wav files were the same size.

Could it be that the level of compression is different form the last time? Besides which, it doesn't really matter. Once you decode that FLAC (or whatever format) back to wav, the file size of the .wav file will be the same. Lossless will still remain lossless no matter what level of compression is used.


Anyway, in case anyone was curious, I've done two experiments in determining whether or not scratches, track quality results, and/or different CDs produce different file sizes when using EAC to rip any given soundtrack. The results were that two different CDs of the same exact soundtrack (One CD being brand new, the other CD being scratched) produced the exact same file size on my computer. With the first trial, I had ripped a soundtrack from a CD several months ago that was scratched, and just recently, ripped the same soundtrack from a different CD that was brand new (and thus no scratches). I, then, ripped the scratched CD again to see the track quality report, and as expected, there was a difference in the track qualities. For the second trial, I had also recently purchased two copies of the same soundtrack: One new and one used with scratches. Like the first trial, the results were that both copies produced the same exact file size on my computer with the track qualities once again being varied between the two result reports. My next trial will involve two scratched CDs and my fourth one will probably involve three CDs of the same soundtrack.

I might have an explanation for this. First off, as I've come to find out, track quality isn't really what tells you whether the track being ripped is identical to the original, really it's to tell you that there was an error in reading from that particular track so EAC had to go back and re-read it so as to extract the information. Because EAC re-read the track, it got all of the info needed to produce an identical copy.

In the case of your scratched CD, EAC probably had to re-read the track several times before extracting the data, therefore, resulting in a different track quality.

OK rusty_nail, I found some info regarding this, sorry if it's a little late. :)
Question about EAC "quality" (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=6536)

So it's probably a better idea to request that "Copy & Test" is used so that you can compare CRCs. Identical CRCs = an identical copy of the disc/track (with the exception of improper read Offset correction).

True, although I've become aware that it seems the 'test and copy' option is available solely when ripping the tracks separately. When I rip a CD as an image with a .cue, it doesn't allow a test and copy, otherwise I would've done it. Any solutions?

True, although I've become aware that it seems the 'test and copy' option is available solely when ripping the tracks separately. When I rip a CD as an image with a .cue, it doesn't allow a test and copy, otherwise I would've done it. Any solutions?

Strange. The option is there, "Test & Copy Image & Create CUE Sheet", I have it posted in my tutorial. here's a pic of the option:

Directly below "Copy Image & Create CUE Sheet".


I've tested this with with one of my CDs, and the Status and Error Messages report:

(http://imageshack.us)

This is from the ISO Image of the CD, not individual tracks.

I've recently become aware of this xD It was as simple as looking at the options available O_o Question; does the fact I haven't done this for any of my rips mean that my stuff is obsolete? For example, everything I put up is 100.00%, but even then, since I haven't tested AND copied the CRC's, does that mean it's busted or useless in any way? Question two; is there any way to see if my CRC result is accurate, given I can't make second rips of alot of my collection now that I no longer actually physically have the albums?

Problem solved; I checked through the log files of everything I have ripped, and it turns out the CRC's are both tested and copied for almost everything I have bar a few things recently ripped. Everything I've currently uploaded I've ripped in the last two weeks. Problem solved. I still have those CD's so I'll re-rip, but I'm going to reupload Guilty Gear & Valkyrie profile in single file archives, because I hate splitting it all up.

Could it be that the level of compression is different form the last time? Besides which, it doesn't really matter. Once you decode that FLAC (or whatever format) back to wav, the file size of the .wav file will be the same. Lossless will still remain lossless no matter what level of compression is used.

I might have an explanation for this. First off, as I've come to find out, track quality isn't really what tells you whether the track being ripped is identical to the original, really it's to tell you that there was an error in reading from that particular track so EAC had to go back and re-read it so as to extract the information. Because EAC re-read the track, it got all of the info needed to produce an identical copy.

In the case of your scratched CD, EAC probably had to re-read the track several times before extracting the data, therefore, resulting in a different track quality.

Actually, I was aware that track quality wasn't as important as some people made it out to be (hence my initial entry into this topic) as you could rip the same CD three times in a row with EAC and end up with slightly different track qualities each rip session. What I wasn't so sure about was whether scratched CDs would differ in size from CDs without scratches (loss of bytes due to scratches), but given my third test today, it's safe to assume the EAC does a great job of ripping scratched CDs.

Of course, for every digital copy of a soundtrack I have on my computer, I still have the original CD from which it was ripped from. So, file integrity isn't as important to me.

As for the difference in FLAC size of same exact soundtracks from different CD sources, I'm not sure whether I changed the level of compression, but like you said, it doesn't really matter.

I just found it odd.

Guilty Gear XX #Reload - The Midnight Carnival ~ Korean Version [KDSD-00017~18] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?tzjgohvey0w)
Released: 2003.11.06
Uploaded: 2008.11.24
Encode Format: FLAC

X - Kurenai [10EH-3331] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?jyn2yzrzjdz)
Released:1989.09.01
Uploaded:2008.11.24
Encode Format: FLAC

These are complete with tested and copies CRC values, alongside the usual fare.

so when i rip CDs to FLAC does the resulting file have to be 100% if so i have a version of EAC that comes with this thing caled AccurateRip. can something like that gimme perfect results every time or.......... what do i need to get an accurate FLAC rip file from a CD?

Sup TrueLugia121.

Well to answer your first question, NO, track quality does not have to be 100% to be considered "perfect". As explained in some previous posts, that simply tells you that there was a read error and EAC had to re-read the track to extract the data.

You're better off using "Test & Copy" which will create an addition CRC hash in the log file that you can use to compare. You can get all the info you'll need on how to make "proper lossless" rips from my tutorial (Thread 40004) which I've updated recently.

X - Week End [CSDL-3085] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?2m1fgtcoztd)
Released: 1990.04.21
Uploaded: 2008.11.05
Encode Format: FLAC

X Japan - Art Of Life [AMCM-4170] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?zetmkmzfjym)
Released: 1993.08.25
Uploaded: 2008.11.25
Encode Format: FLAC

X Japan - Blue Blood [KSCL-1092] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?3nymyyynwzy)
Released: 2007.02.14
Uploaded: 2008.11.28
Encode Format: FLAC

This is the 2 disc remastered release, the second disc being instrumental tracks.

I'll be uploaded the Final Fantasy VIII OST next, as it's relevant in a VGM thread, and then the Castlevania: Curse Of Darkness OST.

Thanks rusty_nail.

X Japan Blue Blood... hmm, that one sounds familar, I think that I downloaded it awhile ago on some other site but I don't remember what it sounds like.

Looking forward to your VGM uploads (I'm more famliar with that type of music). It should be good to get Final Fantasy anything in perfect lossless. :) Castevania music I've never heard before but lots of people say that it's really good.

X Japan - Blue Blood [KSCL-1092]

Holy god. I took a chance and downloaded it on a whim and I'm fucking blown away. It's like hearing Master of Puppets for the first time.

Thanks for sharing. I wish I had something on your request list =/

Holy god. I took a chance and downloaded it on a whim and I'm fucking blown away. It's like hearing Master of Puppets for the first time.

Thanks for sharing. I wish I had something on your request list =/

In my humble opinion, it is the best. I'm enthralled you like it =D

Final Fantasy VIII [SQEX-100058] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?zhmuqujoldm)
Released: 2004.05.10
Uploaded: 2008.12.04
Encode Format: FLAC

Here's something relevant.

Awesome rusty_nail! :) And based on JudgeIto comment, I too will "take a chance" and check out the X Japan - Blue Blood album. :P

Edit: The link seems to be down, maybe next time you could use anonym.to to make your links anonymous., it also might not hurt to put the links in quotes.

Awesome rusty_nail! :) And based on JudgeIto comment, I too will "take a chance" and check out the X Japan - Blue Blood album. :P

Edit: The link seems to be down, maybe next time you could use anonym.to to make your links anonymous., it also might not hurt to put the links in quotes.

The link is just malformed. Try http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?3nymyyynwzy

Thanks, that worked for me. :)

The link is just malformed. Try http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?3nymyyynwzy

Haha, damn. Sorted that one =) Abit of an error on my part, goodness me. Sooo, what should I put up next? Castlevania: Curse Of Darkness, or something else generally musical? More X Japan? Anything anyone's particularly interested in from the list that they want before anything else?

I want to at least hear Castlevania: Curse Of Darkness before requesting it, it's too bad that so many sites for previewing video game music are biting the dust (KH Insider). Any ideas as to where I can preview this soundtrack before downloading?

I want to at least hear Castlevania: Curse Of Darkness before requesting it, it's too bad that so many sites for previewing video game music are biting the dust (KH Insider). Any ideas as to where I can preview this soundtrack before downloading?

If you don't mind Youtube's audio quality, do a search for "castlevania curse of darkness ost". Compared to Lament of Innocence, it's a nice return to "traditional" Castlevania music (faster pace, a bit of rock, actual guitars, etc.), but it's not the greatest stuff in the world. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffPnifaj-lA is one of my favorites.

EDIT: And so is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy1k4wqx65o

Castlevania - Curse Of Darkness [GFCA-34] (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?z2mivmemitr)
Released: 2005.11.30
Uploaded: 2008.06.12
Encode Format: FLAC

Mean vampire tunes for all. This one's also fantastic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4a5Ct4nOvQ&feature=related

Reuploaded Guilty Gear XX with tested and copied CRC's, and the links been updated if anyone wants to redownload.

Used drive : LG DVD-ROM DRD8160B Adapter: 1 ID: 1
Read mode : Secure with NO C2, accurate stream, NO disable cache
Read offset correction : -526
Overread into Lead-In and Lead-Out : No

Unfortunately, you've used the wrong settings for a few of your rips (or possibly all -- I haven't seen all of your logs.)

The offset should be +594 (http://www.accuraterip.com/driveoffsets.htm) and the Read mode line should be for your burner:


Read mode : Secure with NO C2, accurate stream, disable cache

You can verify your log here (http://eachelper.okamihost.com/php/index.php) and use any of the following guides to configure your EAC properly:

HQShare (http://www.hqshare.net/showthread.php?t=931)
Hydrogen Audio (http://wiki.hydrogenaudio.org/index.php?title=EAC_Lossless_Backup)
Xuncat's Guide (http://www.xs.vc/eac/Setup/setup5.html)

That's strange; my drive isn't capable of cache-ing audio data? I've verified this through the 'detect read features' feature. If I check 'drive caches audio data', wouldn't that be incorrect? I'll quote the HydrogenAudio page you linked me to;

Drive caches audio : Enable if your drive has Caching. (This will erase the cached data after every read so that the secure mode can actually work. If your drive doesn't cache then it's a good thing since this setting cripples your extraction speed.)

If you could explain that to me, I'd be immensely grateful good sir =)

Additionally, the incorrect offset in that log is understandable; it wasn't ripped by me. I downloaded it from somewhere else, and didn't think to check it, assuming it was correct. I'll be deleting that one.

That's strange; my drive isn't capable of cache-ing audio data? I've verified this through the 'detect read features' feature. If I check 'drive caches audio data', wouldn't that be incorrect? I'll quote the HydrogenAudio page you linked me to;

Drive caches audio : Enable if your drive has Caching. (This will erase the cached data after every read so that the secure mode can actually work. If your drive doesn't cache then it's a good thing since this setting cripples your extraction speed.)

If you could explain that to me, I'd be immensely grateful good sir =)



The only consequence of enabling the drive cache option, even if your drive doesn't cache audio data, is that it may take longer to rip the CD. Sound quality and read accuracy aren't affected. Also, EAC isn't entirely accurate when it comes to detecting drive features, which is why you should run CacheX and Feurio! to determine if your drive doesn't actually cache audio data. Read step 5a (http://www.xs.vc/eac/Setup/setup5.html) in xuncat's guide for more info.

After checking the drive cache ability with CacheX and Feurio!, you should use the following drive settings:

If your drive caches audio data:



If your drive DOESN'T cache audio data:

The Retreiving C2 Error Information option should always be unchecked.

Lastly, check the read offset setting of your drive in this (http://www.accuraterip.com/driveoffsets.htm) database or take advantage of the AccurateRip feature using a key disc (http://www.accuraterip.com/keydiscs.htm).

I've done everything you've spoken of; my offset's been set to the correct value for a very long time. My drive doesn't cache, as I've verified through the testing you mentioned. That would make my rips fine, would it not?

Yup, all of this is going into my tutorial as I've learned about these thing beforehand. :) If I had it up at this time you could have used it as a referense, but for now you can use the info posted here.

The tutorial, made more simplistic, accurate, and shortened a bit, will be back up in a few days, I hope.

I've done everything you've spoken of; my offset's been set to the correct value for a very long time. My drive doesn't cache, as I've verified through the testing you mentioned. That would make my rips fine, would it not?

Yes, your rips should be fine, but I can't say for the ones you had downloaded elsewhere like the Castlevania - Curse Of Darkness [GFCA-34] or others. I only replied because I'd seen inaccurate settings from the GFCA-34 log and initially thought it was your own rip. Perhaps you can update your list to show which have been done by you personally or indicate which are proper and improper.

BTW, HQShare (http://www.hqshare.net) and MeTaLMaDNeSS (http://www.metalmadness.org/phpBB2/portal.php) have a few of your requests -- proper versions, but not exactly by your 100% track quality standard, since that isn't an indication of a perfect rip as discussed previously.

BTW, HQShare (http://www.hqshare.net) and MeTaLMaDNeSS (http://www.metalmadness.org/phpBB2/portal.php) have a few of your requests -- proper versions, but not exactly by your 100% track quality standard, since that isn't an indication of a perfect rip as discussed previously.

Indeed. I changed the initial post details upon recognizing the facts about the whole 100.00% vs 99.9% thing a while back; I now assert that both 100.00% and 99.9% are appropriate =)

Hey guys! Just posting to update =)

I haven't uploaded in a while because I've thought; why upload stuff no one wants? I personally archive stuff on physical media, because I consider that safest, so there's essentially no reason for me to upload anything until someone requests it. So, if you'd like me to upload anything from my list, I'll be happy to, just give me the word! I'm, no longer just going to randomly upload things though, because it's a waste of my bandwidth if no one cares xD I'm also going to update the list right now, as I've got a few new things.

Well, this entire section of the forum is dedicated for mostly video game and anime music, I'd assume that not everyone will be too interested in downloading large files of music they have never heard before. Just my thinking.

Hey, did you ever get a chance to read the PM that I sent ya?

Just saw this thread and i am interested to see someone here who is into Kamelot. Do you already have the US releases of the albums you are requesting and are you only looking for the Japanese releases of them? I have Ghost Opera and The Black Halo US versions if you want me to rip flac from them.

Well, this entire section of the forum is dedicated for mostly video game and anime music, I'd assume that not everyone will be too interested in downloading large files of music they have never heard before. Just my thinking.

Hey, did you ever get a chance to read the PM that I sent ya?

Exactly =) Although, alot of the things I do have for upload are extremely rare and out of print. X Japan being the most notable; pretty much every single they've got has been out of print for over a decade, and finding them in 1:1 lossless form is near impossible. I had to pay a fortune to get those singles xD Interestingly enough as well, I don't actually have alot of game music at all. I'm terribly interested in buying the Final Fantasy OST's from VII up, but I don't have the money to do so at the moment. I am hunting for bargains though, and if I get something, you guys will be the first to get it in good form.

I did indeed read the PM, and I've done everything correctly EAC wise. I made sure because I really didn't want to suffer the immense mental anguish that would accompany realizing I've ripped everything wrong xD