CD ripping rules and archiving

[contrail]

Music will always be Music.

conor17's guide still helps

[anmisto]

Just an example (not an exception, it's generalized):
https://rutracker.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3980089

Cuetools results:

Rutracker one

Rutracker one

My own rip of the same CD

My own rip of the same CD

The only way to verify a FLAC is ... verifying the FLAC, not the ripping process.

I'm going to have to be specific in this case because that's a bad example. I've actually checked that user's uploads before and the issue is that user modifies the tags and the names of the FLAC's which is very annoying (atleast for me), this is easily verifiable by looking at the log files and current file names, and tags. Since the source mentioned seems legit, I'm assuming the original was kept as the ones in the logs. Unfortunately, this user right here keeps modifying those names and tags which causes the FLAC's to change, since the metadata is inside the file, thus causing erroneous results in CUETools, as you see it.

Ugh, yeah, but not all are like that.

[connor17]

I don't understand why someone post something flagrantly false, when it would take only one minute to see that it was wrong.
Cuetools verification ignores metadata altogether. Errors have nothing to do with tags. As you could see for yourself if you had any sense.
If you take a flac file, and you verify it and shows "accurately ripped", then it's an accurate rip. If you change or delete the metadata, and then you verify it again, the result will be identical, because all those changes have nothing to do with the verification. It would take you maybe two minutes, less than writing that idiotic nonsense.

Ugh, yeah

[anmisto]

I don't understand why someone post something flagrantly false, when it would take only one minute to see that it was wrong.
Cuetools verification ignores metadata altogether. Errors have nothing to do with tags. As you could see for yourself if you had any sense.
If you take a flac file, and you verify it and shows "accurately ripped", then it's an accurate rip.  If you change or delete the metadata, and then you verify it again, the result will be identical, because all those changes have nothing to do with the verification. It would take you maybe two minutes, less than writing that idiotic nonsense.

Ugh, yeah

Looks like I incriminated myself, I see that what I wrote was wrong. But regardless, all I was stating was, in part, all of those user's uploads are like that nonsense. There's always some modifications or the others that take place in those files.

[connor17]

The torrent in the example is labeled as good, when in fact is a bad rip, that's the whole point.
This means that the rules are flawed, because the people who wrote and enforce them don't understand what they talk about. And users just repeat the same nonsense like parrots, because they think that the people who wrote that rules are some kind of experts, when in fact they're just idiotic hipsters, both of them.
In general, private sites rules just show a sense of entitlement of poor idiots that just don't know better.

[Sid]

Conner, you are right, but you're also missing the point.

Consumers are, for the most part, dumb. They don't have to be, and it would be great if they weren't, but the sad truth is that they really are. They don't understand what they are buying (or downloading) and, in spite of what they would say if you asked them, they really don't care. Tell them something is CD-Quality and, as long as it isn't blatantly not, they will be happy.

So you end up with two different kinds of sites (and choice is a good thing for everyone) public: where you will find 163 versions of Dark Side of the Moon and private: where you will find 1 "official" version.

Most of the people using the public site will be happy, and most of the people using the private site will be happy. Maximum happiness. Whether the basis of the happiness of either is spurious isn't important. It's not like CD's are pharmaceuticals, where quality can literally be a matter of life or death.

And if all private sites dropped their rules overnight, allowing 162 more version of each torrent to be uploaded? It would make no difference to the users of the public sites but it would distress the users of the private sites, who would suddenly be forced to start thinking about something they consider not worth thinking about.

[connor17]

In the first post I wrote that the rules of private sites are not really about quality, but about presenting an homogeneous and easy to navigate catalogue, saving users of any brain fatigue. To brag about "the catalogue" is the official sport for them.
The rules are set on stone, not because users understand what they really mean, but because they disguise their ignorance as respect, their sluggishness as loyalty to incontrovertible demiurges.
A side effect of this is the mixture of blatant ignorance and arrogance that comes out of the mouths of those idiots every time you have the pleasure of sharing ideas with them.
The other day, in the hydrogenaudio forum no less, I endure such an encounter with the typical idiot who repeating verbatim some idiotic rule from what.cd (completely and utterly wrong of course) disregard anything I said and called me and idiot on top of that. Later a mod said to him that he was wrong in fact. He then apologised to the mod (respect for the authority is religion for them, maybe they have a paulov response regarding the fear of being banned), and only to him of course.
They say blatantly idiotic things, arrogantly, and when they are proved wrong they just continue like nothing happened. They were born superior. Their stubbornness is comical.
I've had several encounters there. It's kind of fun.
This one was about CD-R. The dude said that if you rip a CD-R, errors are inevitable. Of course that's bullshit, but guess what, it's a rutracker- whatcd rule, that he repeated verbatim. You can see them coming from miles.
Other one was about how the cuetools database works. The dude had no clue, but his arrogance repeating nonsense was incredible. When proved wrong, he just leaved the thread, disregarding it as irrelevant. Negative feedback is inconceivable for them, to learn something a defeat.

What I want to say is that these people are naked beneath all that arrogance, and that I'm not missing the point if my point is just to mock them.