Hi all,

I've been reading and researching posts and various web site and am nearly there... I think I have found the right place here to get the guidance I need, so...
here goes.

Let me start by saying that if I missed a post somewhere that has the answer to my questions, I apologize- please direct me to the link. I am an awful googler.

Here goes:

I am finally taking the plunge and am about to rip a bunch of cds, once and for all, to my new 1 tb media server, and build on that to make an archive.
My issues are:

1) I want best quality for size value (mp3 @ 320 VBR hopefully?)

2) Volume normalization (replaygain that is NOT permanent and easily reversible if needed- ie metadata)

3) Eventual play through itunes and ipod and iphone

So, my decisions, at this point, are:

1) EAC vs dbpoweramp- which is better for metadata, including album art, etc

2) mp3gain vs foobar- which is better for pre-itunes normalization, also easily maintaining integrity of original file

3) has to be played through itunes

So, to sum: I want to create an (as close to lossless) archive, normalize volume without clipping etc (ie replaygain type feature), and have it all play through itunes.

This is all for Windows XP and frankly I might get a Mac soon, but for now let's say Windows but with the media server being an archive for any platform.

Thank you all in advance, I appreciate your help, and look forward to hearing your thoughts. And hopefully, I look forward to hearing my reggae collection in my car via ipod with my hands on the wheel instead of the volume knob.

-X

Couple of answers:

1) Do some ABX testing in foobar with the various standard LAME settings i.e. -V 2, -V 3 etc, I've found from listening I can now use -V 3 happily.
2) iTunes will ignore any replaygain info but do a search for ipodrg.exe on here and you'll find a utility which can use the replaygain info and overwrite iTunes own settings. iTunes does it's own volume normalization but it's equivalent to track gain rather than album gain IIRC.
3) Not a problem with these.

1) Down to choice, I use EAC at the moment to rip to FLAC then batch encode to MP3 in fb2k for my iPhone. Thinking of trying dbPowerAmp now though
2) foobar is a program not a method for applying gain though it has a good replaygain scanner
3) Will all work fine through iTunes.

Whether it's on a Mac or PC it doesn't matter as the MP3s are compatible.

HTH and I'm sure others will comment.

You might want to consider going with AAC if this is for Itunes, IPod, and the IPhone. EAC has REACT 2 to do it's external tasks. dbPowerAMP on the other hand is better at tasks like converting on the fly. It's completely up to you which one you decide to use you could go either route. I tought MP3Gain applied the tags to the file permanently? What it comes to is I am not confident, but I am pretty sure Itunes doesn't read ReplayGain tags. You may want to keep that in mind also. It's not "normalization" either just to clarify things.

Good luck with your project.

Questions:

1) if you want the best quality-for-size ration, 320kbps (which only comes in CBR, not VBR, as 320 is the max frame-size that the mp3 standard can support) is exactly what you don't want. It's using tons of space, for likely no improvement over Lame -V0. For most people, Lame -V0 is overkill too, and has relatively little improvement over -V2 despite a large increase in bitrate and filesize.
As probedb recommended, you should do some ABX testing to see at what level of Lame VBR you can start to distinguish differences from the original wav file. And then, to play it safe (or OCD), go up one level from there. For example, -V4 is nearly-always indistinguishable to me, but I usually encode at -V3 just to be careful (and others with better hearing may appreciate my collection more). For the record, V2 is considered the standard that is transparent to the vast majority of people on the vast majority of audio samples.
You could use AAC as HotshotGG mentioned, but keep in mind this will play on limited number of platforms compared to mp3, so you'd be limited if you ever wanted to switch away from an iPod.

2) replaygain values can be stored in tags in the file, or applied to the mp3 file in increments of 1.5 dB. Technically, applying the replaygain values to the file (sometimes referred to as "mp3gain" although both foobar2000 and mp3gain have capabilities to just write tags or to apply the gain values to the file) is reversible, but I don't know why you'd want to reverse it. Most albums have peaks near 100% anyway, and the mp3 encode goes over 100% and therefore has clipping.
You can use the ipodrg.exe to convert already-scanned replaygain values to iTunes soundcheck values (why didn't they just use an existing standard which is better anyway?)

3) mp3 and AAc formats will be fine to play through iTunes and iPhone

Decisions:

1) I don't have the knowledge to recommend EAC vs. dbpoweramp - I use EAC, but dbpoweramp may be easier if you want to rip a lot of albums at once and have everything managed for you.
Of course, you could always use iTunes. There are ways to use Lame as the encoder in iTunes, and just straight-up use the -V settings. If you're wanting everything to be perfect in your iTunes library, this might be your easiest way to go. iTunes doesn't have a true secure ripper, but has some jitter correction and would probably be fine to use with the majority of your cd's, and with scratched cd's then use EAC.

2) mp3gain and foobar2000 both have replaygain scanners and can apply gain values to mp3 files by altering the volume value in the frame header. I'd recommend using foobar2000 because it can write the tags in id3v2, whereas mp3gain only writes Ape tags which aren't compatible with iTunes (though they may be readable by ipodrg.exe in which case you'd be okay)

3) again, you're fine with mp3 or aac to play through iTunes. Make sure you tag using id3v2 tags (and ideally id3v2.3, or foobar2000's "compatibility tagging mode" to ensure that the tags are properly read by iTunes. I'm not sure about dbpoweramp's capability here, but I assume it's fine.

It writes tags, but not permanently.


Correct. iTunes instead uses Sound Check, which is embedded in tags for iTunes-ripped files and in the iTunes Library files for those encoded in other programs.


Well, technically, it's volume normalization. When most people think of the term normalization, however, they're referring to peak normalization.

As I explained above, both mp3gain and foobar2000 can do both with calculated replaygain values: just write tags, or apply the values to the file. It's sort of a misnomer to say "apply the values to the file permanently" because the process is reversible, so technically it isn't lossy.

The common terminology surrounding replaygain and mp3's is messed up and misleading.
"replaygain" is commonly used to refer to calculating values and writing tags
"mp3gain" is commonly used to refer to applying calculated values to the mp3 data, an option that is available with mp3 but not with other formats

I always apply calculated replaygain values (album-gain values) to mp3 data, because that way I'm not dependent on having a DAP that reads replaygain (or soundcheck) values.

Is there a reason you're not ripping to lossless?

What i would recommend is ripping to lossless, flac is recommended. Use whatever tool gives you confidence in good rips, and is easy for you to use.

At this stage, use foobar to replaygain your flac collection. This is the time to ensure your tags are accurate. Now you have a music archive, in lossless. If you backup properly, you'll never have to re-rip your collection again.

Next you need to decide what codec/bitrate to use for lossy. Foobar's abx tool is great at helping figure out what is transparent to you. Spend a couple of hours ABXing some of your own music, and some of the difficult samples that can be found here at HA. You'll find a bitrate (likely lower than you expect) that is perfectly transparent to you. You could bump it up a notch or two in quality to hedge against finding a place where it's not transparent.

Now convert all your flacs with foobar to your chosen codec/bitrate. Make sure to use the replaygain processing to permanently alter the volume level of the output file. The last step is important for playback device compatibility. Your lossless files will be permanently altered, but your lossless archive will not be. Your lossy files will play properly with replaygain levels, anywhere your codec is supported.

Dump your lossy files into itunes or whatever else you're using for management of your devices, and you're good to go. If you ever decide to change lossy formats/bitrates, it's simple to re-encode from the lossless files, without re-ripping your cds.

This is the workflow that i found best for use with an ipod. Itunes never sees my flacs, as the only time i use them is when converting them to lossy. I switched from MP3 to Nero AAC when i bought my first ipod, and am sort of regretting that decision, because I can't seem to get gapless playback on my ipod with nero AAC. However, if i decide to go back to Lame, the process will be fairly easy, since i have my lossy archive to work from and don't need to dig out my cd's and re-rip.

MP3Gain stores changes to the global gain field in a tag and can easily be undone, foobar2000 does not; or has something changed?

dBpoweramp has a new feature called PerfectMeta:
http://forum.dbpoweramp.com/showthread.php?t=16750

You should probably grab yourself a tag editor. I recommend TagScanner, though most recommend mp3tag. Both are easy to use.

I use -V3 and find it to be transparent based on personal ABX testing.

Everyone, thank you very much for the comments and advice.

I have some follow up questions and comments that I will post later after I get home from work.

In the meantime, I will continue to marinate on all of this.

-X

I just have to say, this sounds funny. Or rather, the associated mental image looks funny.

I think the metaphor's rather a good one. I like the idea of marinating in advice. It gives the sense of a slow process.

But I have to admit I would rather use booze than advice as a marinade for myself.

Indeed as gerwen says, if you are planning on ripping once and only once, Lossless is the way to go (if you have the HDD space for it), even if you plan on creating mp3s from the lossless archive (converting lossless >> mp3 is effort free, where as ripping CDs is not).

Well, let me just say that 'marinate' did incorporate booze, to the point that I haven't yet given all of your thoughtful replies the attention they deserve.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Marinate

I think I've decided on a plan, at least preliminarily.

You all seem partial to dbpoweramp, and it sounds like it is better for ripping in bulk, and it sounds like it has better tagging potential. So I will go with that.

It also sounds like everyone likes foobar to replaygain, so I will go with that.

What I am not clear on, however, and hope someone can clarify is how to incorporate the benefits of replaygaining everything in itunes. Bottom line, that's what I need, and it's not clear to me how to get there. Can I simply use foobar to replaygain everything at the tag level, or must I affect it at the file level for itunes to incorporate it? And what's ipdrg.exe potential to help this problem? I think Sound Check sucks in itunes and I want to keep it out of the equation entirely.

Curious to hear your thoughts.

Thanks!

I take it you're not going with lossless then?


There are two ways to use replaygain such that iTunes recognizes it (well, three ways if you count ripping first to lossless)
1. apply replaygain to mp3 data (foobar language) - the volume value in each frame header is modified, in increments of 1.5 dB. This is fully reversible if you remember how many increments of 1.5 dB the file was changed (mp3gain writes an "undo" tag with this value) but I see no reason why you'd want to be able to reverse it to the original.
2. convert replaygain values to iTunes-specific soundcheck values, as detailed previously in this thread
3. encode using a --scale value (or convert from FLAC or other lossless file while taking replaygain values into account). This also works with non-mp3 formats, whereas #1 will only work with mp3

I think that 1 and 3 are preferable because the actual audio data in the file is at a replaygained volume level, whereas #2 requires you use an audio program that can take certain types of tags into account for playback. Now, I wish everything could read replaygain tags, but lots of programs don't (including iTunes, which has to muck around with a stupidly-conceived soundcheck system when the replaygain standard was already in existence). And if you end up playing your files on a player other than your iPod, you'll still have consistent volume levels if the replaygain values are actually applied to the audio data.

Tim,

I am still not sure whether I want to dedicate the space to ripping to FLAC vs mp3... I am leaning towards doing it however, based on your comments and those of others above. I was just thinking that if I were to rip at a high enough bit rate then I would save a ton of space without sacrificing noticeable difference in listening quality. If I rip to FLAC, then I will have not only the massive FLAC archive, but also an mp3 library off of which I would play through itunes (or whatever player). Since I am bound to itunes for the time being (moot point here), I am just disappointed that Apple doesn't make this any easier, unless you bend over and use their formats and versions of everything.

I guess I am just bummed that Apple sucks like that. I mean, I really want to like them. But it's just really pathetic that itunes doesn't accept replaygain, for example, that Sound Check sucks, and that Apple is so damn proprietary. I'll probably get some heat for saying it, but more and more I feel like Apple is the new Evil Empire when it comes to all of this. I mean, damn, they went to a 3rd party for help and all they got was Sound Check? Super weak.

#1 will work with aac as well, with mp3gain using aacgain, at least.

Just to throw in my two cents here, maintaining both a lossless and lossy library is really pretty easy once you get used to the idea. If storage space is a non-concern, then you're significantly better off ripping directly to a lossless format and forking a lossy library off it. The reason being that, in a few years, you may feel differently about MP3 (for whatever reason that may be) and decide to start "fresh". By having the lossless library, you should never have to re-rip your CDs to rebuild your lossy library.

You mentioned that you have a 1TB media server, and I'd imagine that not all of the space is being dedicated to music (or is it?), but your collection may not occupy that much space in both lossless and lossy depending on how many CDs you're looking at. If space is an issue, you could always marinate on buying more hard drives. I saw 1.5TB Seagates going for a mere $83 yesterday, so storage costs shouldn't prohibit you from taking the lossless+lossy path.

As far as Apple is concerned, they've always been a company that isn't afraid to spend money on proprietary solutions when they feel they need to. As far as Sound Check is concerned, it isn't significantly worse than Replay Gain, just different. Both Sound Check and Replay Gain achieve effectively the same thing and both do it well.

Ron,

Thanks for your thoughts. I am now convinced that I should indeed go FLAC with the rip-to-archive and then go to mp3 from there. I am somewhat concerned about space, but you're right, I should get over it as it gets cheaper by the day. My intention with the server is indeed beyond music, to include photos, and maybe even as a back up device. We'll see how quickly the space gets consumed by the music project first and take it from there.

As for the Apple question, I personally hate Sound Check and can hear the negative impact it makes on my music, especially stuff that is heavy on the low-end, like reggae for example. I really hope that when I get into replaygaining everything it doesn't come out sounding like Sound Check makes stuff sound! I am under the impression from everyone here that that will not be the case...

Wow, I'd seen mention of aacgain but figured it was just writing tags (foobar2000 can write tags for any format that supports tags but can "apply replaygain to audio data" only for mp3.
Do you know if there's any plan to add a context-menu option in foobar to "apply replaygain to aac data" same as it has for mp3?

Option #2 as given by timcupery essentially allows your ipod or itunes to use replaygain. IOW, soundcheck metadata is simply the vehicle to get this done; the soundcheck algorithm is not actually being used.

Personally I use option #3, but before that I was using option #1. FWIW, my tracks are boosted by 3dB above the reference level of 89dB because the iPod line out is not as loud as a line out is supposed to be (at least with my model).

@timcupery, I don't know if there are plans to allow for adjusting the level of aac data. I'm not really the one to ask.

That is probably one of the best decisions you can make. However, you might want to think about using Apple lossless (ALAC) simply because it works with iTunes, QuickTime, iPods, and other Apple hardware. dBpowerAMP can rip audio CDs to ALAC and can convert ALAC files to other formats. Just something to think about if you ever want to play the ALAC files on something other than your computer. I archived my entire CD collection last year to ALAC. It came down to FLAC and ALAC. I have a 120GB iPod, AppleTV, and a few other Apple devices so I didn't mind using ALAC. Some people don't like the idea of using a "closed" audio format (ALAC, WMA lossless, ATRAC3, etc.).

I also wouldn't worry about space as stores like Best Buy are selling 250GB USB2.0 hard drive for around $50. In fact, Best Buy was selling a USB2.0 Seagate hard drive with a 250GB capacity for $45 last week. I even went into Circuit City yesterday and they were selling a 1TB USB2.0 hard drive (I think it was made by Western Digital) for $150. The prices of internal hard drives have fallen just as much but it seems like the market is shifting towards external USB2.0 hard drives.