Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Threshold for digital silence in HTOA is too low #491

Open
the-confessor opened this issue Jun 4, 2020 · 7 comments
Open

Threshold for digital silence in HTOA is too low #491

the-confessor opened this issue Jun 4, 2020 · 7 comments
Labels
Feature New feature Needed: discussion More discussion needed before anything can be done (or still no agreement has been reached) On Hold Waiting for other actions

Comments

@the-confessor
Copy link

I noticed a couple of my of CDs end up with a completely silent HTOA ripped.

I do see a number of CDs where whipper detects and ignores the silent HTOA, but for these two CDs I end up with a completely silent track 0.

One CD is Lush - Split (ce67f98a-bfa7-43f7-88fa-38a9df8835c8). Debugging reveals that the peak of the HTOA track is 1.

The other is Interpol - Turn on the Bright Lights (83f64ffa-c945-316b-bd16-10ad714ec334). Debugging reveals that the peak of the HTOA track is 3.

There's nothing listed in MusicBrainz about a pregap track for these CDs, and there's effectively nothing there. I think the desired behavior for these would be to ignore the HTOA.

I wonder if the threshold to consider HTOA digital silence should be increased to a little above 0?

@kevmitch
Copy link

kevmitch commented Jun 4, 2020

Please don't "fix" this. Unless there is literally no data, the track should be saved. The user can then use their own decision process as to whether they want to keep it.

@MerlijnWajer
Copy link
Collaborator

The Internet Archive (archive.org) has the following policy for their Audiophile CD collection:

If the HTOA is less than 75 frames (1 second), or has a peak less than 1e-10, then discard it.

Mostly driven by the fact that a lot of the process is automated. I agree that it should probably be up to the user to discard the HTOA in whippers case.

@the-confessor
Copy link
Author

Ah interesting. So there is a standard defined. I agree with following the standard.

I wonder if it is worth making it configurable to give the user more control. The problem I have with simply deleting the file is that there may still be references to it in the related files (toc/log/etc.)

@JoeLametta
Copy link
Collaborator

JoeLametta commented Jun 6, 2020

I would like to know what's @Freso's opinion about this.
I think the default behaviour for whipper is fine as it is but maybe we could decide to make both the minimum peak level and track duration of the HTOA configurable as settings.

Edit: In a similar vein there's also #282

@JoeLametta JoeLametta added Feature New feature Needed: discussion More discussion needed before anything can be done (or still no agreement has been reached) On Hold Waiting for other actions labels Jun 6, 2020
@the-confessor
Copy link
Author

The option to skip the HTOA file would be a good compromise actually. Whipper can still follow the standard. If a user rips a CD and finds an HTOA track they would rather not have, they can just re-rip and tell it to skip the HTOA this time.

The ability to reconfigure the thresholds might be useful if this were frequently occurring, but my guess is it is pretty infrequent. In my collection of close to 700 CDs I encountered it twice.

@JoeLametta
Copy link
Collaborator

I would like to know what's @Freso's opinion about this.

Ping.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jul 14, 2020

FWIW I'm ripping a pair of box sets where every disk has one of these bogus tracks. Most of them were discarded for being silence, but I did have a couple that were inaudible noise - which is now cluttering up my otherwise pristine logs.

I think there are also examples of HTOA tracks that people wouldn't want, although I think the reasoning for skipping them would largely be related to the logs and cues.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Feature New feature Needed: discussion More discussion needed before anything can be done (or still no agreement has been reached) On Hold Waiting for other actions
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants