Time to convert CD collection to a hard drive

[rivethead]

I want to get rid of all my CDs. I bought a 1TB Seagate external HD to back up all of my media.

My problem is this: I don't know much about ripping CDs or audio file compression.

I do know that I can't stand mp3s with 128, 160, or even 192 compression rates. While some people can't tell the difference, I definitely can hear the difference (vs playing a .wav file).

I also know that storing everything in .wav format won't be the most efficient. Besides being completely uncompressed and using the most storage space, can you even tag a .wav file with the associated information (band, song name, cd cover art, etc.)? Also, I don't believe my Samsung mp3 player can play a .wav file. I'd like to store all my audio in a format that my mp3 player can use.

So I think I'm looking for some type of ripping software/tag editor/lossless compression thing.

Can someone point me in the right direction?

Thanks!

 

[TKE899]

I believe this may have been discussed here prior. I personally use EAC (Exact Audio Copy) with the LAME compressor. It's a little tricky to setup but is by far the best setup you can use to rip your CD's. It extracts a .wav file to your HDD then converts the extracted file to .mp3 in whatever compression rate you have it setup for. I personally rip disks at 320 kbps VBR. Seems to sound the very best while still compressing to a more manageable size.

Google EAC and there are several sites that will give you the proper setup steps. Hope this helps.

 

[Modelworks]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Lossless_Audio_Codec

 

[43st]

I've recently been through a similar ordeal. If you want to use lossless then consider either Flac or Apple lossless, they both support tags (.wav does not). But if you have CD's, then maybe consider keeping them as your lossless source rather than filling a hard drive. I still don't trust hard drives in the long run. The first CD (Primus - Frizzle Fry 1990) I purchased is still in perfect shape. I don't think I even have a hard drive from that era anymore.. what would that be? a 4 MEGAbyte drive? heh.

I use 160 kbps VBR AAC (.m4a). From what I've read and heard this is the best bet in quality per byte. I use this through a 5 gen Ipod, RSA portable amp, and ATH-EW9 headphones. The sound quality was a substantial upgrade from 192 kbps .mp3's I had before.

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: Modelworks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Lossless_Audio_Codec

This ^

In a day of sub $100 TB hard drives there is no excuse IMO to use lossy compression.

 

[Slick5150]

Well, while I agree FLAC is a great way to go, its not the most universally compatible format.. So, if you want to have stuff readily available to load onto a portable MP3 player, a car MP3 player, etc... You have to convert it again from FLAC->MP3.. So, there is a certain appeal to having everything converted to a LAME-VBR encoded MP3, which based on my own personal listening experiences, is virtually indistinguishable from the source material anyways..

So, its a matter of preference in that sense. If you're only really going to be playing stuff back from the PC anyway (or don't mind doing a second conversion when needed), then just go with FLAC. If having something more compatible is a concern, then a LAME-VBR MP3 is an excellent option.

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: Slick5150
Well, while I agree FLAC is a great way to go, its not the most universally compatible format.. So, if you want to have stuff readily available to load onto a portable MP3 player, a car MP3 player, etc... You have to convert it again from FLAC->MP3.. So, there is a certain appeal to having everything converted to a LAME-VBR encoded MP3, which based on my own personal listening experiences, is virtually indistinguishable from the source material anyways..

So, its a matter of preference in that sense. If you're only really going to be playing stuff back from the PC anyway (or don't mind doing a second conversion when needed), then just go with FLAC. If having something more compatible is a concern, then a LAME-VBR MP3 is an excellent option.

I would much rather have the original copy of the CD on my computer and rip from that than have to go get my CD everytime I want a different bitrate or format.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: Slick5150
Well, while I agree FLAC is a great way to go, its not the most universally compatible format.. So, if you want to have stuff readily available to load onto a portable MP3 player, a car MP3 player, etc... You have to convert it again from FLAC->MP3.. So, there is a certain appeal to having everything converted to a LAME-VBR encoded MP3, which based on my own personal listening experiences, is virtually indistinguishable from the source material anyways..

So, its a matter of preference in that sense. If you're only really going to be playing stuff back from the PC anyway (or don't mind doing a second conversion when needed), then just go with FLAC. If having something more compatible is a concern, then a LAME-VBR MP3 is an excellent option.

op doesn't like 192, wonder if his player can handle higher bitrate? Also, wma is more efficient than mp3 right? so he might be able to get less compressed sound with the same file size.

OP maybe you need to post the spec of said player. What can it play?

 

[rivethead]

Shoot, I wish I was knowlegeable enough to know.

It's a Samsung 2GB player. A 2 year old model. I know it can't play .wav files as WMP automatically coverts those to mp3 before putting them on the unit.

I appreciate everyone's response. I've done some research (including searching the forums which I should have done to start with) and I think I'll rip using FLAC. Those will be stored on the external 1TB HD I just purchased. I'll store music files converted to some variable rate compression (I need to research this LAME thing) on my internal HD and use those for playing.

I just wanted to make sure my archive had great sound quality AND good tag info (album art, band, song, etc.). I want it highly organized.

This is all unfamiliar to me (EAC, FLAC, LAME, CDex, etc.) so I appreaciate the leads.

 

[KeithP]

You might want to look at AAC. From what I have read, at a given bit rate, it sounds better than MP3. Apple uses it on their stuff (iPod/iPhone) but it is not an Apple format. Many more devices are starting to support it as well. For instance, my 2007 Hyundai Sonata radio supports both MP3 and AAC.

-KeithP

 

[Baked]

EAC (the program) + LAME (the codec) @ 192 VBR. If you can hear the difference between 192 VBR and CD, you're not doing it right, or you have some kinda placebo effect in your head. Don't be a snob and backup your music in FLAC.

 

[ChAoTiCpInOy]

Apple Lossless?

 

[rivethead]

Ok, I decided to go the FLAC route (using EAC) for archiving on my external hard drive.

One question:

Is there a program that will automatically connect to the CDDB or other databases and put a thumbnail of the CD album art into the folder where I'm storing the files? To manually copy and paste a small jpeg of the album art into each folder would be a real pain in the rear but maybe that's my only option?


Thanks!

 

[PurdueRy]

Originally posted by: Baked
EAC (the program) + LAME (the codec) @ 192 VBR. If you can hear the difference between 192 VBR and CD, you're not doing it right, or you have some kinda placebo effect in your head. Don't be a snob and backup your music in FLAC.

What about if you need to transcode a song to a different format? Give me a good reason NOT to backup music in FLAC when a TB hard drive costs as low as $90

 

[rivethead]

I may have (kind of) found a solution:

http://www.muvenum.com/products/muvundercover/

Anyone have any experience with this product or know of an alternative (preferably free)?

 

[sdifox]

how many CDs are we talking about here?

 

[mc866]

Originally posted by: rivethead
I may have (kind of) found a solution:

http://www.muvenum.com/products/muvundercover/

Anyone have any experience with this product or know of an alternative (preferably free)?

You could try this, looks like it more or less replaces a program that I used to use that isn't supported any more which was album art aggregator.

 

[Baked]

Originally posted by: PurdueRy

Originally posted by: Baked
EAC (the program) + LAME (the codec) @ 192 VBR. If you can hear the difference between 192 VBR and CD, you're not doing it right, or you have some kinda placebo effect in your head. Don't be a snob and backup your music in FLAC.

What about if you need to transcode a song to a different format? Give me a good reason NOT to backup music in FLAC when a TB hard drive costs as low as $90

I don't. I either listen to the original CD on my stereo system or MP3 at said format on my MP3 player.

 

[rivethead]

Originally posted by: sdifox
how many CDs are we talking about here?

Probably not more than 300.

 

[sdifox]

Originally posted by: rivethead

Originally posted by: sdifox
how many CDs are we talking about here?

Probably not more than 300.

so just grab 300 jpgs, no biggie. You don't have to do it all in one sitting.

So when the ripping is happening, you can go find the jacket art on amazon or something.

 

[daniel1113]

EAC > WAV > FLAC

It's all you need.

 

[LtPage1]

If you use iTunes, rip to AIFF. If you don't, use FLAC. Seriously, sooner rather than later you absolutely will regret not having everything in lossless.

edit:

Originally posted by: ChAoTiCpInOy
Apple Lossless?

From what I understand, Apple Lossless is not lossless. It's still compressed.

 

[scootermaster]

Originally posted by: LtPage1
If you use iTunes, rip to AIFF. If you don't, use FLAC. Seriously, sooner rather than later you absolutely will regret not having everything in lossless.

edit:

Originally posted by: ChAoTiCpInOy
Apple Lossless?

From what I understand, Apple Lossless is not lossless. It's still compressed.

This is true, but not in the way you mean.

The file is, of course, compressed, otherwise there'd be no reason for it (other than metadata, I guess). But just because it's compressed doesn't mean it's lossy. The amount of information stored is the same between a WAV file and an AAC file.

I assume you're on a PC. On a Mac, since we don't have EAC, I'd use XLD.

 

[themisfit610]

Yep.

A truly mathematically lossless codec like FLAC or ALAC (Apple Lossless) will decode to a WAV that's bit-perfect when compared to the original. In other words, I could run an md5sum on the WAV before compression and get the same result running it on the WAV after compression.

Lossless a great thing! In most cases, you can expect a 1/3 to 1/2 reduction in bitrate compared to the source. 2ch 16 bit 44.1 KHz uncompressed PCM is 1536kbps, so you can expect ~600-1200kbps, depending on how compressible the source is, and how fast you want encoding to go.

Using foobar2000 it's very easy to transcode your FLAC masters / mezzanine files to MP3 or AAC when you need to load up the portable device, or burn a CD for the car. Simply drop a folder into the playlist, select all the tracks, and right click, selecting "convert to..."

Easy

My two cents: I'd suggest AAC if your portable device supports it. It's definitely better than MP3. Nero offers a free AAC encoder that's really excellent at higher bitrates, especially when using VBR.

Apple's AAC encoder is very good too.

If you go with MP3, then LAME is the best option, period. It's quite good!

~MiSfit

 

[zmaster]

have you guys ever heard of jet audio?
it connects to a database server that id's the songs on an original cd,
its free
and it rips a cd to a multitude of formats.