2011 ripping/encoding general poll Options

[bt_escm.9]

CD archival - FLAC -6

iPod - QuickTime TVBR AAC ~130kbps

One file per track

[The Seeker]

I didn't see the point of keeping my lossless files deleted them all.

You may come to regret that, I know I did.

[dilpill]

I use FLAC for archival and listening on my desktop computer, and Vorbis -q5.0 for portable and network listening.

I have a few tracks in AAC and MP3, but all of my lossless music is in FLAC.

[Billytheonion]

I don't think AAC is going anywhere in my life time. Not like im going to wake up one day and Apple announce they no longer support AAC.

[Yuna]

For archival purpose : FLAC -5

For portable : mainly MP3 -V 2 however, I have some of my collection in AAC and OGG.

Rip : One file per track

No trancode for lossy format but for lossless I convert all APE, ALAC, WV, TAK found on the web in FLAC -5. With only one lossless format my collection is easier to manage.

[sh1leshk4]

TAK for archival, MP3 & AAC for portables.

TAK really has gone a long way ever since its announcement on April 1st a few years back; really wonder how many people initially thought that thread was an April fool's. =b
It's pretty much the ideal lossless format regardless of it not being an open source one.

[Yuna]

TAK for archival, MP3 & AAC for portables.

TAK really has gone a long way ever since its announcement on April 1st a few years back; really wonder how many people initially thought that thread was an April fool's. =b
It's pretty much the ideal lossless format regardless of it not being an open source one.

There is no ideal format either lossless, lossy, open source or not nowadays. The best format depends on the use made of it and everyone's opinion. So it's very subjective. I don't know enough the TAK format for judge it.

This post has been edited by Yuna: Feb 28 2011, 02:27

[sh1leshk4]

The best format depends on the use made of it and everyone's opinion.

You said that yourself, unless you didn't count my opinion as an opinion; whichever suits your argument best, then.

[hellokeith]

FLAC as it is the one chance to stop Apple Lossless or WMA-L becoming the standard...

From all appearances, Microsoft has abandonded any further work on audio. And there does not appear to be a Windows Media group any more. So I would not worry to much about WMA-L. Although, if it were not so restricted, it would be a great standard.

[kode54]

Lossy : for both my Cowon J3 and my computer: Nero AAC 1.5.4 at q.65 (~240 - 265kbps).

Lossless: for archiving (one file per track copied to my external hard drive): Monkey's Audio v3.99 (4.06 for the whole bundle) Extra High which is not that slow to encode with an i7 .

Why not Insane?

I don't think AAC is going anywhere in my life time. Not like im going to wake up one day and Apple announce they no longer support AAC.

The Almighty Apple would never do that to us!

[yourlord]

I rip to FLAC, 1 file per track. When listening to audio on my computers, I listen to the FLAC's.

When I want to transfer music to my DAP's I do batch conversions to vorbis -q2.

If I'm transferring to a DAP that doesn't support vorbis (I don't own any), then I encode to mp3 using lame -V2.

The reason I use FLAC is I want to be able to access my music collection 30 years from now, and with FLAC I know I will be able to. Openly documented and unencumbered formats are the only option that can satisfy that requirement.

I also rip to and store FLAC since it gives me a perfect copy to transcode to any lossy format I need without losing quality due to multiple lossy encodings.

[AllanP]

My whole music collection is encoded in Nero AAC 128 kbps ripped/converted from CD/Lossless audio files and I use it on both my computer and cellphone.

It sounds transparent (for me) in 95% of cases and when it is not transparent it is (for me) so close to the original so I do not care.

This post has been edited by AllanP: Mar 2 2011, 00:24

[2tec]

I myself, mostly rip to FLAC, however, as far as others go, very few people seem to even know what lossless audio is. Even if I didn't rip anything to mp3, I'd still have to deal with it, as there's still the rest of the world that seems bent on buying, or sharing, compressed songs. I wonder what will happen when storage constraints don't really apply?

[B7k]

I use flac for archival purposes and use aoTuV Beta5.7 ogg -q5 although I'm thinking of using the new aoTuV Beta6.02.

[SpiderJon]

I wonder what will happen when storage constraints don't really apply?

Realistically they already don't - certainly in HDD terms. Portables are still somewhat restricted, although 32GB can hold a lot of lossless albums :-)

Up until now I've used FLAC for archival and stuff I felt 'deserved' it* and MP3 v0 for stuff I didn't think needed FLAC and/or which I wasn't worried about having archived.

But now that I've upgraded my fileserver with a huge HDD I suspect things will mostly be FLAC from now on.

* hopelessly irrational, I know. But human psychology is a strange and wondrous thing. Perhaps someone should look into the placebo effect in relation to audio encoding? (eg, ABXing suggests I can't tell the difference between MP3 v0 and lossless, but I somehow feel some things are better if they're lossless).

This post has been edited by SpiderJon: Mar 2 2011, 19:10

[Zarggg]

Perhaps someone should look into the placebo effect in relation to audio encoding? (eg, ABXing suggests I can't tell the difference between MP3 v0 and lossless, but I somehow feel some things are better if they're lossless).

You just defined the placebo effect right there.

[Light-Fire]

1) I rip to ALAC for archiving purposes (1 file per track) using XLD + AccurateRip.

2) Convert from ALAC to ALAC using iTunes so I can stream them to my Roku Soundbridge using iTunes as a server (iTunes "doesn't like" to stream the XLD files). Then I delete the original XLD encoded ALAC.

3) Convert from ALAC to MP3 320 kbps using iTunes and use MP3 Gain with album gain to normalize at 92.0. iTunes will stream only files created by iTunes (that's why I don't use LAME). I use those files to burn MP3 CDs to play in 2 different car CD players and to, sometimes, transfer to an old Sony MP3/ATRAC player (they have to be CBR because of compatibility problems with the old players and I use 320 kbps because I am NOT using LAME and, sometimes, I transcode them on the fly to ATRAC into the Sony player, to squeeze some more music in it's 512 Mbyte memory).

4) I convert on the fly from ALAC and/or MP3 to AAC 128kbps into the iPod.

This post has been edited by Light-Fire: Mar 3 2011, 03:48

[SpiderJon]

Perhaps someone should look into the placebo effect in relation to audio encoding? (eg, ABXing suggests I can't tell the difference between MP3 v0 and lossless, but I somehow feel some things are better if they're lossless).

You just defined the placebo effect right there.

As I say, I know it's irrational.

But, like Niels Bohr reputedly said when someone asked him if he really believed a horseshoe above his door brought him luck - "Of course not ... but I am told it works even if you don't believe in it." :-)

[Zarggg]

What exactly are you going for then, when you say "look into the placebo effect?" This forum is primarily concerned with demonstrable differences in perception, rather than subjective differences ("it sounds different/the same because I think it should") such as those from the placebo effect.

This post has been edited by Zarggg: Mar 4 2011, 20:10

[SpiderJon]

What exactly are you going for then, when you say "look into the placebo effect?" This forum is primarily concerned with demonstrable differences in perception, rather than subjective differences ("it sounds different/the same because I think it should") such as those from the placebo effect.

My apologies - it was an attempt at humour that obviously didn't work.

(Although you're mistaken if you think the placebo effect isn't demonstrable or 'objective' - eg, people get just as cured from placebos as they do from actual medicine. But that's a whole other discussion :-)

[Diow]

On the PC I use an Sony MDR-V900HD phone to hear the music, preferencially lossless.
After years using Monkey's Audio Extra High with one file per album + cue switch to FLAC with one file per track.
With MP3, -V4 on the mobile phone and -V2 on the car.

[Agent69]

For me, it is Exact Audio Copy for extraction, FLAC for lossless encoding, and Foobar2000 for listening. I use a Powershell script to convert my FLACs into MP3 format for my iPod and Netbook.

I use one file per track and I refuse to give a damn about cover art.

[Louck]

I'll switch to lossless when it replaces mp3 in popularity. I cannot ABX LAME -v2 even on killer samples from this forum. But I do have part of my library in flac. I rip to lossless only absolute top tracks that I've been listening to for many years, though I can't really ABX them from mp3 versions.

This post has been edited by Louck: Mar 5 2011, 16:30

[antman]

MP3, FLAC, Per Track.

I used to play with encoders a lot but it just doesn't interest me anymore. At most I'll change MP3 settings and that's it. Open up the 2012 poll so I can go ahead and vote in it too.

[skexu]

Personally: Ripping to wavpack hybrid -b440, one file per track, but since OptimFrog 4.910b came, I consider moving. It finally has foobar2000 1.x plugin, it has hybrid mode which I used in WavPack, and it's always the "lol10megssaved" factor (Encoding speed doesn't matter.)

In the other thread I said I use aac and rarely mp3, here voted aac. But I always convert from lossless. I don't like handling CD's because my dvd drive has problems with itself