A Guide To Posting In ABMA(under construction - A rewrite of Lanky's guide) The main aims of these guidelines are to reduce the difficulties and frustrations of group users and so encourage everyone to join in and help. In summary the guidelines are:-
1. Organise the filenames and Subject: lines of the books/posts to contain the author, book title and part number. The recommended format of the Subject: line is: Author - Title [x of x] e.g. Tom Sharpe - Porterhouse Blue [01 of 20] Examining the filename and the reasons for this sort of format.....
Subject header starting with numbers rationale: Starting a Subject: line with the author's name followed by the title allows newsgroup users to "stack" the listing of headers in alphabetical order by author. The part number e.g. [13 of 20] allows the above author/title order to be further optimised in a logical order. Never, ever start a Subject: line with the part number, or any number. The reason for this is that the order of headers will be affected by anyone else (including you if you post multiple books) using part numbers at the beginning. E.g.: [01 of 25] Tom Sharpe - Porterhouse Blue Filenames starting with numbers rationale: File naming is a subjective personal preference so these aren't hard and fast rules. They are common-sense suggestions that may have not occurred to you. Uploading and sharing your files are just one step in the equation. You may have uploaded the files from one folder on your hard drive. You must be aware of the final step in the equation, i.e. people will be downloading your files. One thing you may not have considered though is that most people download books in bulk from several different posters. The upshot of this is that they usually end up with one folder full of files. They then have to sort out those downloads in an organised way. You can help them with a bit of forethought on your part. Be mindful of the way you name your files in relation to how others do it. Here are some recommendations... Obviously, including author and title should be a given, and to differentiate one file from another some numbering reference should be used, e.g. disk number, chapter number, track number etc. Do not be tempted to put the numbering reference first though. If you do, for similar reasons stated above, a folder full of files can become a nightmare to organise. The file-managers of various operating systems all default to displaying files in alphabetical order. This means that any files with names starting with numbers will be at the top of the list, with no differentiation about author etc. All the files that begin with a 1 will be together, so will the ones starting with 2 etc. Additionally, whenever using number references consideration should be given to using leading zeros, e.g. 01 (when there is a maximum of 99 files), 001, 002 etc (when there is a maximum of 999 files). The reason for this is that some software/operating systems distinguish between "1" and "01" when ordering numerically. This means that all number with a "1" as a first numeral will be grouped together, e.g. 1,11,111 Without the use of leading zeros this can happen: [1-25] Tom Sharpe - Porterhouse Blue It is also recommended that filenames not be too long. Different operating systems have different maximum file name lengths. It is also the case that different operating systems have different maximum path lengths, e.g. Windows NTFS has a maximum path length of 256 characters. So if you have given your filenames a lengthy filename, when downloaded onto a system that has a smaller maximum some of the characters (not including the extension) will be lost which can have an effect on how the files are ordered in a file-manager Other Subject: line contents: It is acceptable behaviour to use some standard acronyms in the Subject: header to impart extra information such as a new rip (NR), uploading someone else's rip (NMR not my rip), a repost (RP), answering someone's request (By REQ) etc. The trick is to impart as much clear information as possible whilst using the minimum amount of characters as possible. Some other important abbreviations can also be helpful such as Abr or Unabr (meaning abridged and unabridged respectively). Obviously not all posts will be files being posted, there will be several variants of text only posts including making requests and replying to other posters' comments. Making Requests: When making a request it is helpful to understand that what you are actually doing is asking someone you don't know to go to the time, trouble, effort and expense to give you something that you either want or need. Accordingly you should make your request in a polite and respectful way. Obviously this isn't a rule that must be obeyed, but on the other hand if you don't then the chances of you having your requests answered are minimal! There are several simple ways to make requests, and there are a few ways that you really shouldn't. An example of a straight forward request is: REQ: George Bush - Holidaying in Iraq. Many thanks. or Any chance of someone posting an Enid Blyton flood? Cheers. Basically there is no set way of doing it, but so long as it's clear, to the point and respectful then it will be okay. What you shouldn't do is:
The first three should be obvious, but the last two may need some explaining. Making repeated requests so that the Subject: header shows a block of your requests is a no-no. It's considered to be demanding, rude and irritating, as such there is little chance of you getting yoru request filled. Likewise and all caps headers is considered to be shouting, these are called "Billboarding", and similarly they will also most likely go unanswered. Shouting at people to post your a book is not the best way to go about it! .NFO files rationale: It is always advisable to make the .NFO file the very first file to be posted when you post a book. They are only small text files and can easily be downloaded quickly so that the prospective downloader can make an informed decision as to whether he wants to download your book or not. .NFO files are simple to create, they are just plain ascii text files. The easiest way to do it is download one from someone else's post and simply edit it to reflect your books settings. Any text editor will do the job. Just make sure that your line-lengths are set to about 72 characters. Good sources for gaining information on the description sections of the .NFO file can be found at Amazon (US) or Amazon UK, Fantastic Fiction or the producers of the audiobook (eg Booksontape, Harper Audio MS Windows' default file association for .nfo files is to open System Viewer. This is an application that is rarely used by anyone so it is quite safe to change the association to your favourite text editor or NFO viewer. The easiest way to change the file association is to right-click (shift-right-click on Windows versions prior to XP) on the file and choose "open with" from the submenu. Allow the next submenu to open then choose "program". If your preferred text or NFO viewer is in the list shown to you then choose it and tick the box at the bottom to "always open" that file extension with your selected program. If the program you want isn't in the list just click "browse", find the executable of the program you want then follow the on screen instructions. In the days before broadband became so common it was usual for rippers/posters to use 32kbs/22kHz as the standard settings for books. The reason for this was that file size was kept small (approx 6Mb per 30 mins) and so could be downloaded in a reasonable time over a 56k modem. The problem was that audio quality raged between barely acceptable and god-awful. These days with high speed connections file size isn't quite as important, but the more die-hard collectors are starting to value sound quality over filesize. When ripping CDs (or tapes) the first thing to go should be the dual channel of stereo. If there's only one voice then stereo is somewhat redundant. Some will argue that if it's stereo on the CD then it should be stereo on the rip. Actually this is a misunderstanding of the way audio is contained on a CD. The Red Book standard for audio CDs doesn't actually support mono. So what happens is that if youw ant a CD to be in mono it has to be mono sound on the left channel and the same mono sound on the right channel. Now the whole idea of compressed audio is to get rid of audio data you aren't going to hear to enable the filesize to be as small as possible whilst maintaining quality. It should be obvious now that retaining a stereo MP3 of a single mono voice is a waste of filespace. The next thing to take into account is the sample frequency. CDs themselve contain audio sampled at 44.1kHz. This means that it can support an audio frequency range of about 20hz - 20kHz. Now there are some who argue that this is far more than necessary to cover the frequency range of the human speaking voice which is in the range of 85hz to 8kHz (roughly speaking). The problem is that when using lower sample frequencies, e.g. 16kHz or 22kHz some of the harmonic frequencies above 8kHz are lost. The human brain and hearing is optimised for listening to human speech. It's no coincidence that the frequency range of the voice is right in the middle of our total frequency range. The upshot being that we are very sensistive to voices and our brains react when something that should be there is missing. It isn't aleways obvious that we aren't hearing something but it can manifest itself in various ways such as "I can't seem to quite get into that book", "I liked the story but there was something not quite right about the narrator". The upshot of all this is that it is recommended that you leave the sample rate as it comes off the CD, i.e. 44.1kHz. The single biggest thing that can affect quality is the bitrate you select to rip at. Should it be 32kbs or 48 or 56, or should it be 96, 128 or even 256 or the maximum of 320kbs. Well the first thing you need to ask yourself is how much audible data are you prepared to throw away? The smaller the bitrate the more data is lost. It's lost because the smaller the number, the slower it can move data from the file to the player. Without going into too much detail, and taking liberties with absolute accuracy the easiest way to understand bitrates is to use a radio analogy. The following is based on mono sound: Relative sound quality
Now, I hear you ask yourself, "I'd heard that 128kbs is roughly equivalent to CD audio?". well yes it is... for a stereo source such as a music CD. Please bear in mind that the sound quality of a mono file at 64kbs is identical to the sound quality of a 128kbs stereo file. Remember, you've thrown away a channel so the necessary bitrate halves. A lot of people convince themselves that they can hear the difference between an audiobook ripped at 64/44 mono and say, 96/44 mono. Well if they can they are either fooling themselves or they are listening to a lousy rip. You could certainly hear the difference if you were listening to music, but at 64/44/mono there is very little audio data being lost when encoded a human voice. The moral of this is that the accepted quality vs size standard of most of the experienced posters/ripper is to rip at 64kbs at 44.1kHz in mono. Another question to ask is to normalise or not to normalise. <<<<< Old below here>>>>>>
|