Recommendation for cue splitter?
Bob S
I'd like to split the files for an MP3 player. I'd
appreciate recommendations on what program I can use to do
this.
The web site I bought the recordings from recommends using
Cue Splitter, which is found here:
http://www.enfis.it/downloads.php?cat_id=1
Unfortunately, I went to that site and found the
instructions for using the program to be incoherent. The
program seems simple enough if all I'm going to do is load a
cue file and hit the split button to split off every single
track, but I can see I'm going to be lost if I want to do
anything beyond that. (For example, one of the MP3's I
downloaded has 6 different compositions, consisting of 3
tracks each, for a total of 18. I'd like to split each
composition from all of the others, but maintain continuity
throughout a single piece -- resulting in 6 separate mp3
files. If that can be done with Cue Splitter, I don't see
where the tutorial talks about it, and experimentation
hasn't led me anywhere.)
Can anyone recommend a program for this job -- one that
comes equipped with instructions that make sense? I don't
want to spend an arm and a leg, but I'm more than willing to
pay a reasonable price for something that I can learn to
use.
Thanks.
--
Bob S.
muchan
Bob S wrote:
> I downloaded some recordings which came as single MP3 files.
> I'd like to split the files for an MP3 player. I'd
> appreciate recommendations on what program I can use to do
> this.
>
>
> Can anyone recommend a program for this job -- one that
> comes equipped with instructions that make sense? I don't
> want to spend an arm and a leg, but I'm more than willing to
> pay a reasonable price for something that I can learn to
> use.
>
> Thanks.
> --
>
> Bob S.
Maybe this one: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
muchan
Alan Cooper
Bob, you don't need a program to do what you want to do. If you take a look at the cue
file, you will see that it is a simple text file. Here's one courtesy of the good people
at Pristine Audio (the Quintetto Chigiano Brahms f-m Piano Quintet):
PERFORMER "Brahms"
TITLE "Piano Quintet"
FILE "PACM010.mp3" MP3
TRACK 01 AUDIO
TITLE "Mvt. I - Allegro non troppo "
INDEX 01 00:00:00
TRACK 02 AUDIO
TITLE "Mvt. II - Andante un poco adagio "
INDEX 01 11:08:60
TRACK 03 AUDIO
TITLE "Mvt. III - Scherzo (Allegro) "
INDEX 01 20:26:22
TRACK 04 AUDIO
TITLE "Mvt. IV - Finale Poco sostenuto - Allegro non troppo "
INDEX 01 28:00:37
Now if you wanted to combine tracks 2 and 3 into a single track, you would just open the
file in a text editor, delete the three lines beginning TRACK 02, and renumber the
following tracks (TRACK 04 becomes TRACK 03, and so forth if there were more tracks). Now
Cue Splitter will divide the big file into three tracks instead of four, the former tracks
2 and 3 will be combined into a single track 2, and the former track 4 will be track 3.
You also might want to edit the TITLE line of your new track 2 so that it accurately
describes the revised content, but it's not necessary to do so. Be sure to save your new
cue file after editing, and probably you should rename it so as not to overwrite the
original.
The alternative suggested by another poster (to use an audio file editor like Audacity to
paste the separate tracks together) would work, too, but it's a more cumbersome operation,
imo. That's the best solution for dividing up a big audio file when you don't have a cue
file to work with, however. And Audacity is a fine piece of freeware, like Cue Splitter.
Best wishes, AC
Andrew Rose
If it's OK with you Alan, I'll use this as the basis of an 'advanced cue
splitting' page on our site! I'd never considered this as something one
might wish to achieve. I'll also e-mail the author of the cue splitter
program and suggest it as a possible option in future...
Thanks
Andrew
--
Andrew Rose - Pristine Classical
The online home of Classical Music: www.pristineclassical.com
Bob S
> [snip]
That looks easy. I'll try it when I get home tonight.
Thanks large.
--
Bob S.
Bob S
> Maybe this one: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/
Alan's description of how to modify the file should do the
trick, but audacity looks useful for several reasons. I'll
download it tonight.
Thanks for the recommendation.
--
Bob S.
ne...@thump.org
>The web site I bought the recordings from recommends using
>Cue Splitter, which is found here:
>http://www.enfis.it/downloads.php?cat_id=1
IF you have 1 large file (flac, mp3) and 1 cue file ... and want to
split the large file into tracks, then use foobar2000.
Foorbar won't read socalled non-compliant cues: these are produced by
EAC.-
Foobar2000 is a very handy piece of software. Its great for format
conversion, and can lookup and tag collections of files that have been
ripped from CD.
I've used it for lots of things especially cue splitting and tagging
my flac files.
Neil
Andrew Rose
For example, one of the MP3's I
> downloaded has 6 different compositions, consisting of 3
> tracks each, for a total of 18. I'd like to split each
> composition from all of the others, but maintain continuity
> throughout a single piece -- resulting in 6 separate mp3
> files. If that can be done with Cue Splitter, I don't see
> where the tutorial talks about it, and experimentation
> hasn't led me anywhere.
I've proposed this to the cue splitter author - hopefully this should be
reasonably straightforward to implement in future versions of the
software...
Alan Cooper
news:45ae4f62$0$27404$ba4a...@news.orange.fr:
Incorrect! Delete the 3 lines beginning with TRACK 03 (see below). What follows is
correct, however.
>>and renumber the following tracks (TRACK 04
>> becomes TRACK 03, and so forth if there were more tracks). Now Cue
>> Splitter will divide the big file into three tracks instead of four,
>> the former tracks 2 and 3 will be combined into a single track 2, and
>> the former track 4 will be track 3. You also might want to edit the
>> TITLE line of your new track 2 so that it accurately describes the
>> revised content, but it's not necessary to do so. Be sure to save
>> your new cue file after editing, and probably you should rename it so
>> as not to overwrite the original.
>>
>> The alternative suggested by another poster (to use an audio file
>> editor like Audacity to paste the separate tracks together) would
>> work, too, but it's a more cumbersome operation, imo. That's the
>> best solution for dividing up a big audio file when you don't have a
>> cue file to work with, however. And Audacity is a fine piece of
>> freeware, like Cue Splitter.
>>
>> Best wishes, AC
>
> If it's OK with you Alan, I'll use this as the basis of an 'advanced
> cue splitting' page on our site! I'd never considered this as
> something one might wish to achieve. I'll also e-mail the author of
> the cue splitter program and suggest it as a possible option in
> future...
OK with me, but be sure to correct my mistake (at least I think it was a mistake :-). I
said to delete all three lines beginning with TRACK 02 in the sample cue file above, but
that's wrong. In order to combine Tracks 2 and 3 into a single track with the right
starting time, you have to delete all three lines beginning with TRACK *03* (not TRACK 02
as I originally stated), and then renumber the present TRACK 04 as 03. If you delete the
three lines beginning with TRACK 02, you will combine Tracks 1 and 2 into a single track,
instead of 2 and 3. Sorry for the confusion, but my main point is that editing the cue
file offers the simplest solution to Bob's problem.
AC
Bob S
> Incorrect! Delete the 3 lines beginning with TRACK 03 (see
> below). What follows is correct, however.
Well, I just did it. Very easy, changed titles and all. It
required only one hand while I ate dinner with the other.
Thanks again for the help.
--
Bob S.
Bob S
> I've proposed this to the cue splitter author - hopefully
> this should be reasonably straightforward to implement in
> future versions of the software...
Thanks.
In the meanwhile, as I just mentioned to Alan his method
worked quickly and easily -- on your Myslivicek, Sinfonie
Concertanti recording, by the way.
--
Bob S.
Andrej Kluge
Bob S schrieb:
> Well, I just did it. Very easy, changed titles and all. It
> required only one hand while I ate dinner with the other.
Fingerfood? :)
Ciao
A.
Andrew Rose
As with all these things, the software is written with the pop music
market in mind - we just collect the crumbs that fall from the table and
put them to best use... ;-)
Andrew Rose
> Bob S wrote:
>> Andrew Rose <and...@pristineaudio.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I've proposed this to the cue splitter author - hopefully
>>> this should be reasonably straightforward to implement in
>>> future versions of the software...
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> In the meanwhile, as I just mentioned to Alan his method
>> worked quickly and easily -- on your Myslivicek, Sinfonie
>> Concertanti recording, by the way.
>
> As with all these things, the software is written with the pop music
> market in mind - we just collect the crumbs that fall from the table and
> put them to best use... ;-)
>
>
This has now been transferred (with credits!) to our site - thank you
for both the question and the solution:
http://www.pristineclassical.com/More/AdvancedSplitting.html
Andrej Kluge
Andrew Rose wrote:
> This has now been transferred (with credits!) to our site - thank you
> for both the question and the solution:
Just out of interest: why don't you (at Pristine Classical) generate one MP3
for each individual movement right from start, and use combined ones only
for those (rare) works where seamless transition is really necessary? This
would avoid all the hassle with CUE sheets.
Ciao
A.
Matthew Silverstein
> Just out of interest: why don't you (at Pristine Classical) generate one
> MP3 for each individual movement right from start, and use combined ones
> only for those (rare) works where seamless transition is really
> necessary? This would avoid all the hassle with CUE sheets.
That might be a solution, but I really don't see much "hassle" at all. I'd
never split a large mp3 using a CUE file before, but I downloaded the
suggested software and did it in a matter of minutes. What's the big deal?
Matty
Andrej Kluge
Matthew Silverstein wrote:
> That might be a solution, but I really don't see much "hassle" at
> all. I'd never split a large mp3 using a CUE file before, but I
> downloaded the suggested software and did it in a matter of minutes.
> What's the big deal?
For me, it's no big deal either, but as you see in this thread, others may
be overwhelmed by certain difficult tasks.
Ciao
A.
Alan Cooper
news:51c5mmF...@mid.individual.net:
Andrew has a good reason for doing it the way he does, although I no longer remember what it
is :-) Either he has offered the explanation here, or else it's somewhere on his web site.
Perhaps he'll restate it for us. In any case, I agree with Matty, and after working with
EAC for a while, I like fooling around with cue sheets. More to the point, I find it more
convenient to download a single file in one fell swoop as opposed to several smaller files.
The latter option seems to increase the possibility for something to go awry.
AC
Andrej Kluge
Alan Cooper schrieb:
> point, I find it more convenient to download a single file in one
> fell swoop as opposed to several smaller files. The latter option
> seems to increase the possibility for something to go awry.
This one's easy: just put them together in one ZIP archive for download.
Ciao
A.
Andrew Rose
The reason is what might now be termed 'historic' - in more ways that
one. The website began with material entirely derived from 78rpm
recordings, which left a continuous background noise from the shellac discs.
At the same time, one of our first recordings was the Bach 48, which I
wanted to be able to offer as separate preludes and fugues - in other
words 96 tracks, with a similar number of potential gaps.
The combination of the two led me down the route of cue sheets -
ultimately. In fact we initially simply offered the long MP3 files, and
waited to see what the reaction would be. Cue sheets came a few weeks
later, and appeared to solve some of the initial criticism.
I would envisage sticking with this in the future, but perhaps alongside
other ideas. At least one of the record companies who we'll be bringing
online in the next few weeks has expressed a strong interest in
splitting their CDs down into individual works - though interestingly,
not individual movements. As such I can see the cue-sheet model
continuing to work in this format as well as with complete CDs.
What I have yet to get my head around is how this would affect covers
and sleevenotes. I guess the simplest option is to sell a single work
bundled with sleevenotes and covers for the full original CD, but it
would of course depend on the record companies as to whether they'd
sanction this.
What I am keen to develop is a site which caters for the classical
enthusiast, rather than a catch-all site. This will mean cutting out the
repackaging and compilation material, and also perhaps being selective
about other material. If nothing else I want to avoid the problem of
general searching for classical recordings online - where the response
brings so many results as to be pretty useless, in some cases.
Your thoughts and feedback in this area would be most welcome.
Matthew B. Tepper
following letters to be typed in
news:45b27be4$0$27403$ba4a...@news.orange.fr:
> What I am keen to develop is a site which caters for the classical
> enthusiast, rather than a catch-all site. This will mean cutting out the
> repackaging and compilation material, and also perhaps being selective
> about other material. If nothing else I want to avoid the problem of
> general searching for classical recordings online - where the response
> brings so many results as to be pretty useless, in some cases.
Spot-on here! Amazon.com searches, and sometimes even Arkivmusic.com ones,
bring up such huge quantities of kipple through which one must sort.
--
Matthew B. Tepper: WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page -- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page --- http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Harrington/Coy is a gay wrestler who won't come out of the closet
Andrew Rose
> Andrew Rose <and...@pristineaudio.com> appears to have caused the
> following letters to be typed in
> news:45b27be4$0$27403$ba4a...@news.orange.fr:
>
>> What I am keen to develop is a site which caters for the classical
>> enthusiast, rather than a catch-all site. This will mean cutting out the
>> repackaging and compilation material, and also perhaps being selective
>> about other material. If nothing else I want to avoid the problem of
>> general searching for classical recordings online - where the response
>> brings so many results as to be pretty useless, in some cases.
>
> Spot-on here! Amazon.com searches, and sometimes even Arkivmusic.com ones,
> bring up such huge quantities of kipple through which one must sort.
>
organisation and sale of pop music to classical music. Search for
Beatles Sgt. Pepper and there's only one recording of it (though it may
exist in various remastered formats, there won't be many). Search for
Beethoven 5th Symphony and you'll get dozens of results to wade through.
There has to be a better way...
Matthew B. Tepper
How true! It used to be that Amazon.com actually made the effort to have a
decent advanced search engine for classical music, then they took it away.