+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| INTRODUCTION |
| To satisfy the long lasting audiophile's demand for a music scene of higher |
| quality than LAME mpeg compression encoding, and since nowdays space and |
| bandwidth are able to accomodate more, this set of rules were made to |
| initiate the LOSSLESS music scene space. |
| To avoid mistakes made in the music scene in the past, a group of old farts |
| gathered to decide upon these rules. A common understanding amongst all is |
| that material from non-physical media can easily be doubtful of its |
| origin of source and hence of questionable quality. To keep things simple |
| and to avoid mess as experienced in existing music scene, these rules |
| decided to strictly consider only physical media as a valid source. |
| |
| NOTE: The definitions of these keywords are to be interpreted as follows: |
| MUST=obligatory (not allowed if not comply). |
| SHOULD=suggested. |
| CAN+MAY=optional (allowed if not comply). |
| |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| GENERAL |
| 1.1 Releases must contain a SFV, NFO, JPG (proof). |
| 1.2 Currently valid media sources are: CD, VINYL for the time being. |
| 1.3 Bonus tracks from previously released albums must be released separately.|
| Obligatory " BONUS TRACKS " dir tagging (ref to rule 3.6). |
| 1.4 Releasing a previously released album again is only allowed if: |
| .1 The previous release was ripped from a lower quality source. |
| Higher to Lower: CD > Vinyl |
| .2 The new release has 30% or 5 tracks more. |
| .3 The new release has bonus tracks and the previous release is older |
| than 91 days. |
| 1.5 Trackfixes are not allowed, bad quality rips require a complete repack. |
| Obligatory -REPACK- dir tagging (ref to rule 3.6). |
| 1.6 The following reasons can be a reason for a bad quality rip: |
| - One or more tracks from the release are incomplete or contain skips. |
| - The tracks are distorted and constantly clipping (eg. vinyl rips). |
| - The tracks contain a constant hiss which was avoidable (eg. vinyl rips)|
| NOTE: A -PROPER- rip with no hiss should exist. (also -PROPER- must |
| mention which release its propering in nfo). |
| 1.7 If tracks from release were already pred as bonus or inside any other |
| reissue/limited/special/deluxe editions they will be considered as dupes.|
| 1.8 The maximum directory and filename length is 128 characters. Directories |
| and filenames must only contain valid characters: a-z A-Z 0-9 _ . - () |
| 1.9 Releasing a retail is not allowed if its 100% identical to advance |
| release. |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| ENCODING CD/VINYL |
| 2.1 Releases must be encoded using FLAC 1.2.1 with compression level 8 (best)|
| 2.2 Encoding quality must be: 44.100 Hz / 16 bit PCM (2.0) for CD sources |
| and 48.000 Hz / 24 bit PCM (2.0) for VINYL sources. |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| RELEASE NAME |
| 3.1 The FLAC tag must be included in the release name before YEAR-GROUP. |
| 3.2 Release name MUST contain: Artist, Title, Source, Year, Group. |
| 3.3 Using CATALOGUE number in a release name is optional but recommended. |
| 3.4 Currently valid SOURCE tags: |
| - CD, CDS, CDM, CDR, MCD, CDEP (2CD, 3CD etc.) |
| - VINYL, VLS, LP, MLP, EP (2VINYL, 3VINYL etc.) |
| 3.5 Currently valid TYPE tags: |
| - Advance, Bonus, Bootleg, Deluxe, Digipak, Ltd, Limited, Mag, Magazine, |
| - Promo, Reissue, Remastered, Retail, Sampler, 7-Inch, 10-Inch, 12-Inch, |
| - Special, Collectors, Ed, Edition, Extra, Flexi, Split, Demo, Tracks. |
| 3.6 Currently valid ADDITIONAL tags: |
| - DIRFIX, NFOFIX, PROPER, READNFO, REPACK, BONUS |
| 3.7 LANGUAGE (LANG) must follow the ccTLD identifiers (2-chars): |
| http://www.iana.org/domains/root/db/ |
| 3.8 Mandatory release name formats: |
| - Artist-Title-SOURCE-FLAC-YEAR-GROUP |
| - Artist-Title-LANG-SOURCE-FLAC-YEAR-GROUP |
| - Artist-Title-LANG-TYPE-SOURCE-FLAC-YEAR-GROUP |
| - Artist-Title-(CATALOGUE)-LANG-ADDITIONAL-SOURCE-FLAC-YEAR-GROUP |
| - Artist-Title-(CATALOGUE)-LANG-TYPE-SOURCE-FLAC-YEAR-GROUP |
| - Artist-Title-(CATALOGUE)-LANG-ADDITIONAL-TYPE-SOURCE-FLAC-YEAR-GROUP |
| 3.9 Internal releases must be tagged GRP_iNT. |
| Internal releases must follow FLAC ruleset. |
| Internal releases must not dupe an existing one that is 732 days old |
| or newer. |
| 3.10 YEAR tag must be the year when the record company/artist published it. |
| (example: release originally released in 1990, but rip is from 2000 |
| reissue correct year would be 2000, with additional TYPE tagging. |
| 3.11 LANGUAGE tag is MANDATORY for non english releases. |
| If the vocals are non-english and the majority of them must be described |
| using one TLD country code abbreviation, then the most appropriate |
| TLD SHOULD be chosen and MUST be used as a tag in the release name. |
| 3.12 Typos in a release name ARE NOT TOLERATED. A proper ADDITIONAL tag must |
be used to fix it -DIRFIX- (ref to rule 3.6). |
| |
| NOTES: |
| - CATALOGUE + TYPE are optional tags. Altho when using, must be filled in |
| correct order. |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| FILENAME |
| 4.1 Filename must at least contain: Track number, Track artist, Track title. |
| 4.2 All filenames (including SFV, NFO, JPG) should always be lowercase. |
| 4.3 Track titles must be exactly the same as written on the covers/cd/inlay |
| and contain all additional infos like featured artists or remixers as |
| long it does not exceed the maximum filename length (see rule 1.8). |
| 4.4 Recomended filename formats: |
| - nr-artist-title.flac |
| - nr-artist-title_(remixer_or_featured_artist).flac |
| - nr-artist-title__remixer.flac |
| - a1-artist-title.flac |
| - b2-artist-title.flac |
| 4.5 Including -groupname in the filenames is allowed but not recommended. |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TAGS |
| 5.1 Filenames must only contain vorbis comment tags (ID3 tags are forbidden).|
| 5.2 Tags must at least have: TRACKNUMBER, ARTIST, TITLE, ALBUM, GENRE, |
| DATE (format: YYYY) (see section 3.x with note). |
| 5.3 FLAC PICTURE block must be empty. Any cover, booklet scans go with |
| additional covers, apply to rule 7.5 |
| 5.4 Tag field contents allow UTF-8 character encoding but it is recommended |
| to use ASCII characters as much as possible. The field contents should |
| not be internationalized; this is only a concession to simplicity not an |
| attempt to exclude the majority of the world that doesn't speak English. |
| 5.5 For the time being GENRE tag MUST be the same for all the files of the |
| release and it MUST be one of the genres listed in the id3 specification |
| list: http://www.id3.org/id3v2.3.0#line-1089 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| PROMO/BOOTLEG |
| 6.1 Promo releases can always be duped by any retail release even if the |
| tracks on both releases are identical. |
| 6.2 Promo releases with voice over, silence, cuts on tracks are not allowed. |
| 6.3 A bootleg is a release or recording that was not officially released by |
| the artist or record company (unofficial / unlicensed recordings). |
| 6.4 Conditions for bootleg releases are: |
| - There are no signs that the record company really released it. |
| - The artist or record company did not confirm the release as valid. |
| - The record company has no connection to the artist on the release. |
| - The record company does not exist and the release not self-released. |
| - The release is not available at at least three retail stores. |
| 6.5 Currently valid retail stores (alphabetic order): |
| - www.amazon.com |
| - www.boomkat.com |
| - www.bestbuy.com |
| - www.cduniverse.com |
| - www.decks.de |
| - www.deejay.de |
| - www.hmv.com |
| - www.juno.co.uk |
| - www.sonymusicstore.com |
| - www.virgin.com |
| - www.ukdancerecords.com |
| - www.walmart.com |
| NOTE: The shop itself must sell the record, no private sellers. |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| PROOF |
| 7.1 Releases must always contain a proof CAMERA picture in JPG format. |
| 7.2 Proof camera pictures must contain both, medium and cover together. |
| If cover isnt possible, a booklet or promo sheet or anything valid |
| proving ripper has release. If the medium/cover/booklet contain anything |
| that may expose your identity, then that part of image can be blurred or |
| blackened. |
| 7.3 The proof picture MUST include small piece of paper over medium and/or |
| cover with GRP name. |
| Artist, title and any other relevant info that proves release, must not |
| be hidden behind the piece of paper. |
| 7.4 GROUP tag must be photographed in the proof picture, software-edited |
| tags are considered invalid proof. Camera picture proof must not be |
| changed except to hide anything that might expose ripper (read rule 7.2).|
| 7.5 Additional scans may be added but DO NOT count for proof. |
| 7.6 Proof camera pictures resolution must be at least 640 width and 480 |
| height in JPEG format. |
| Artist and/or album/single title must be clearly readable. |
| 7.7 Proof fixes are not allowed, missing proof picture or bad resolution |
| requires a complete repack. |
| NOTE: EXIF metadata should be removed from JPEG files! Uniquely identifying |
| information such as the camera serial number and GPS coordinates can |
| pose a security threat if not removed, so this is very ESSENTIAL! |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| Rules signed by (in alphabetic order): |
| |
| 2Eleven AUDIO BriBerY dL FWYH GRAVEWISH LITF MANDY PsyCZ SP3CTR3 SCORN SPL |
| |
| FLAC rules V1.0 apply from 2011-10-03 00:00:00 GMT. |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=P1EUC8A2
http://www.filesonic.com/file/2307200054
Hope a lot of hardcore/hardstyle FLAC releases will be released under these new lossless rules, and its bad that WEB lossless is not allowed.
Starting a FLAC cult in WEB-release retard land, wrong place wrong time really, besides i have the entire Deathchant Label collection in flac and i own the 12" inch vynil collection and (9"inch limited vynil ofc ^^) and over my dead body that i'll ever post anything in FLAC of that collection why because we have WEB releases for that exact intent and purposes you do not share perfect releases they are ment to be bought.
i sincerely hope this losless thing never takes off.
my 2 cents
FLAC = crap
mp3 with 320kbps is the real one.
FLAC is oversized and your ear cant here a difference between 192-320 kbps.^^
@D4RKY, yeah MOST of peepz dont heard the difference beetween 192k and wav
but not all; personally i clearly heard difference from flac to wav (same file),and its not suggestion; the sound is moooore deeeep; but also depends from the style of the music you heard..
i also agree to the fact that web 320k is the best compromise now..
and also that if you want the perfect release you have to buy it
cheers
@Darky
I studied psychoacoustics for a semester and I don't agree with you. The human ear CAN ear a difference between MP3 192k and a loseless format. Aber, regarding the MP3 320k format, it's pretty hard, so on that point I agree with you that it's a pretty good format.
The only problem with mp3 320k ist when labels convert WAVE files to MP3. The convert process always change the wave form of the file, and for exemple, a WAVE file mastered at -0,1 dB (which is good) will be converted in a MP3 that could reach easilly +0,5 dB. So it clips, some informations are destroyed.
A very few, it's not really noticeable, but still...
I've anylised a lot of my hardcore MP3s, and they ALL clips. If labels were wise enough (how the fuck they don't know that??) they would lower the mastered WAVE file of -1 dB before converting to MP3
why do you hear differences between wav and FLAC, when FLAC claims to be lossless? doesn't that mean, that a FLAC file should contain exactly the same information like the source-wav, with the only exception that it is compressed? but there are also people, who think they can hear a difference between different kinds of speaker-wires..
dL FWYH GRAVEWISH PsyCZ
WTF. The rest are the usual unkowns but these 4 (ok, don't really know much about dL) surprised me.
@ darky flac isn't oversized, it's much better quality than web release, trust me but to hear the difference you need an 5.1 or 7.1 surround system (not a crappy one but a real godd badass one) so don't say it's the same and DON'T SAY it sucks
5.1/7.1? imho 2 good studio monitors are good enough
lol, how should you hear any difference with a 5.1-system, when the file is still in stereo? :D so your soundcards only maps the stereo signal to the side-speakers and the result is the same as with stereo-speakers. only the speaker-quality makes the difference
... jeez it's so simple
FLAC/WAV/AIF don't suffer data redundancy (Meaning you can re-record it as often as you wish you will not lose any sound quailty not even at the lowest or highest hz ranges)
mp3 = uses a botched up compression method called Lame Encoding everytime you re-record a mp3 even with the best software you can find you will lose quality even @320 tho most songs hardly ever reach 320 during actual playback, most of the time they drift in and out between 172-256 kbps.
and no FLAC does not have to be better, the actual audio source still matters , so yeah if you cant hear the diff between 320 kbps and FLAC it's most likely because the audio source was either a Mp3 or a very old audio file, and if that was not the case i suggest contacting a Hearing specialist for some hearing-aid ...
2 my cents
"mp3 = uses a botched up compression method called Lame Encoding"
I lol'ed. Even though you might make a valid point your whole argument flies out the window after such a retarded statement.
Nice try though.
What did you want me to say, explain the whole science behind encoding and decoding mpeg layered audio?, i know it works with a form of lossy data, i just pointed to Lame encoder (Perhaps a poor choice of words) since it's by far the most general used encoder
This is a music forum not a tech forum
now run along
I agree with Sm0keythebandit, BUT I also think that MP3 320k is still perfect for our concerns here. Even if I was a DJ playing in a huge stadium, playing Mp3 320k would be cool. They do that anyway; because they know the sound quality in very good. You have to understand that the compression may be important, YES, a lot of informations are lost during the process. But regarding the capacities of the human ear, it's not important. And believe me, I'm a quality addict, I hate shitty MP3 128k, you can notice the bad sound quality easily. But even between a 256k and 320k, it's almost not possible to make a difference with a WAVE/FLAC file.
Open a program like Sound Forge, Wave Lab or Audacity (this last one is free) and make tests by yourselves. And also, observe the distance between dots, and the changes in the wave form.
And finally, check the Fletcher–Munson curve. It's really interesting to discover that what the human ear hears is not the reality, especially at a low volume. That's why most of soundmen make mixdown at a volume of 80 to 83 dB.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fletcher%E2%80%93Munson_curves
That doesn't really matter with bitrate, but it does with frequency. Once again, 44,1 kHz is more than enough. 40 kHz would still be perfect for our ear, because no one can hear over 20 kHz (and we need to double this amount in order to let our brain processes the information).
Reading a MP3 or a loseless (Wave, FLAC) with a 5.1 or 7.1 system change nothing. MP3, Wave, etc, are stereo format, which means they only 2 channels (letf + right). 5.1 and 7.1 are made for movies, where the mixdown is now done on 7 different channels. The ".1" refers to the lower frequency (sub-bass). Music is mixed on 2 channels only.
You may find interesting to know that they have developped a 22.2 surround sound a few years ago. That means 24 speakers, including 2 different sub for right and left!
FLAC in the scene is a fucking stupid waste of time. You could re-encode current V0 releases to FLAC and without analyzing waveforms people wouldn't even notice. Check out the releases in the section so far; total creditwhores, nothing even worthwhile. It's completely lame and it seems like nobody has any sense in the scene anymore.. forgetting all the other reasons why this is dumb, 1:1 copies was never supposed to be the intention for the music scene.