On 28 Oct 2015 18:55:25 GMT, LeftCoastDave <somebody@somewhere.edu>
wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 01:23:04 -0700, mulberry wrote:
>
>> On 24 Oct 2015 01:00:39 GMT, LeftCoastDave <somebody@somewhere.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I've not posted in quite some time (never before to this group).
>>>
>>>I lean towards including pars and such. If my post falls short of what
>>>you wish, plz give me constructive ideas. Also, I inadvertently posted
>>>one "Steve Goodman" set with tags. My mistake. IMHO, posts would best be
>>>without tags so that one can most easily reconstruct the original CD.
>>>However, I always add tags AFTER DOWNLOAD to my flac files with MP3TAG,
>>>for which I know of no Linux nor Mac equivalent.
>>>
>>>More to come...
>>
>>
>> '...posts would best be >without tags so that one can most easily
>> reconstruct the original CD...
>>
>> Forgive me - what exactly does this mean?
>> What difference does it make if the tags are there or not?
>>
>> I don't know if I'm just slow today or what, but I've never heard of
>> this before.
>> m
>
>M,
>"Tags" are metadata that are (most often) text to describe the song title,
>author, composer, time duration of the track, and a lot more stuff. They
>can also include an image (ideally a VERY small jpeg of the album cover; I
>would advise posting files with a jpeg).
snips
I know what tags are. That wasn't the question.
My question was why is it easier 'without tags' to reconstruct a CD,
emphasis on 'easier to reconstruct'.
I was more curious than anything else why someone would post
without tags, but thanks for answering.
snipped
>
>Does this all make sense? Hope so.
I boiled it down to one doesn't have to erase tags if they
are there...so that makes it easier.
Cheers
m
|
|