Well i decided to flop all my CD's down into MP3. Easy enough task I thought I had a registered copy of Music Match JukeBox. still think thats the BEST Software out there (for organizing at least) Boy i could rip a cd in minutes I was all set. Then I stareted reading....
Well i was a third of the way throught ripping my collection @ 128 bit CBR Fhg when i read about lame and --r3mix, hmmmm time out....
Well i was about a third of the way through ripping my collection when i read that the --r3mix is "passe" or Die Toten Hosen (for my german friends)
Well i was about a third of the way through ripping them @ --alt-preset standard... when i decided on another change in strategy
I decided to knock em down to wav files until i have read everything i can on the subject, then when i have made up my mind once and for all I will run the Razor Lame batch process fom hell
Well I gotta make a move those wave files take up a lot of space man!
It seems the more i read the more confused i get. What is a good safe bit rate/scheme/preset or whatever. I listen to them on my digital audio reciever with the audio being passed from my sound card's spdif-out to coaxial digital input. Sound's great so far. I will also want to make mixed CDs and would like them to have a close to possible sound to the originals.
My questions are:
1) what is archive quality or close enough for my needs without going full CBR 320? Is preset extreme insane enuff?
2) I have seem some posts from Dibrom and perhaps otheres refering to some "sample" clips or impulse signals that get all snarled with preset standard and can i get some of those clips are there any links and test i could recreate to see what this degredation is all about
Thank in advance and i think what you all are doing and / or involved in is really neat! Keep it up!
Full Version: Confused Newbie's Hard Drive is getting full
If you want to stick with mp3, alt preset standard should do you just fine. You _may_ notice a thing or two once in awhile, but unless you're an anal audiophile you won't notice anything anoying. It's very impressive quality. The slowdown issues, to the best of my knowledge, have nothing to do with quality of the encode. You can go alt preset extreme to be on the safe side, but I wouldn't worry about it.
But that's all _if_ you want to go with mp3. It's definitely the way to go, currently, where hardware (and ignorant friend) compatibility is concerned. And it'll endure for awhile. But if you'll continue to want to be on the cutting edge, you might look into other compression formats, such as mpc, ogg vorbis or aac/mp4. MPC-standard will provide you with equal or slightly better quality than mp3 alt preset extreme, at a lower average bitrate. MPC -extreme will give a similar average bitrate to mp3 alt preset standard. Ogg Vorbis has room for improvement, but is already better (on most stuff) than alt preset standard at the same bitrate. And the future looks bright for hardware support. I don't know that much about AAC, but I know that it has good overall quality at a wide variety of bitrates, like ogg vorbis does.
Another solution is to compress your files in lossless format (monkey's audio, LPAC, FLAC, etc.), and then decode to wav and reencode with lossy compression once you've settled on the format you want to go with. This will at least temporarily free up some hardware space. Or just get a bigger hard drive.
But that's all _if_ you want to go with mp3. It's definitely the way to go, currently, where hardware (and ignorant friend) compatibility is concerned. And it'll endure for awhile. But if you'll continue to want to be on the cutting edge, you might look into other compression formats, such as mpc, ogg vorbis or aac/mp4. MPC-standard will provide you with equal or slightly better quality than mp3 alt preset extreme, at a lower average bitrate. MPC -extreme will give a similar average bitrate to mp3 alt preset standard. Ogg Vorbis has room for improvement, but is already better (on most stuff) than alt preset standard at the same bitrate. And the future looks bright for hardware support. I don't know that much about AAC, but I know that it has good overall quality at a wide variety of bitrates, like ogg vorbis does.
Another solution is to compress your files in lossless format (monkey's audio, LPAC, FLAC, etc.), and then decode to wav and reencode with lossy compression once you've settled on the format you want to go with. This will at least temporarily free up some hardware space. Or just get a bigger hard drive.
Thanx timcupery
You are right I havent noticed anything anoying from the mp3's yet. But... I have started to realize just how many of my CDs are in poor shape. Too many years of neglect. Thats why archiving this is very important for me. I know I could make a duplicate copy of every CD but its a little extreme! If I could fit 7 or more albums on a cd in mp3 format that would be great. And one day when track #10 on FleetwoodMac - Rumours becomes totaly unusable I can burn a new copy that will be for all intents and purposes "equal" to the original.
This is a fairly big project and i want to do it once and i want to do it right. Thats why I want archive quality.
Do you know if a 254 CBR preset will yield better results than alt-preset extreme? I just dont want to read in a week that "oh wait stop the presses" that wasnt good enough or that 3.91 stable wasnt all that stable.
Also I was wondering if there were any test clips i could listen to to see how one compression setting handles the tuff stuff differently than the next setting. Any links?
Thanx for the reply and thats a kewl photo, looks like it was a beautiful morning there!
QUOTE
If you want to stick with mp3, alt preset standard should do you just fine. You _may_ notice a thing or two once in awhile, but unless you're an anal audiophile you won't notice anything anoying. It's very impressive quality.
You are right I havent noticed anything anoying from the mp3's yet. But... I have started to realize just how many of my CDs are in poor shape. Too many years of neglect. Thats why archiving this is very important for me. I know I could make a duplicate copy of every CD but its a little extreme! If I could fit 7 or more albums on a cd in mp3 format that would be great. And one day when track #10 on FleetwoodMac - Rumours becomes totaly unusable I can burn a new copy that will be for all intents and purposes "equal" to the original.
This is a fairly big project and i want to do it once and i want to do it right. Thats why I want archive quality.
Do you know if a 254 CBR preset will yield better results than alt-preset extreme? I just dont want to read in a week that "oh wait stop the presses" that wasnt good enough or that 3.91 stable wasnt all that stable.
Also I was wondering if there were any test clips i could listen to to see how one compression setting handles the tuff stuff differently than the next setting. Any links?
Thanx for the reply and thats a kewl photo, looks like it was a beautiful morning there!
For serious archiving, i wouldn't necessarily go with MP3. For 7+ albums on one CD, use MPC --insane, with a quality better than you can achieve with MP3, at bitrates usually below 256 kbit. If you want to use MP3, use --alt-preset extreme (my motto for archiving: always use a one notch better setting than you originally intended, so that you aren't disappointed in a few years).
For test samples, go here: http://ff123.net/training/training.html (has several links to more samples).
For test samples, go here: http://ff123.net/training/training.html (has several links to more samples).
Have you considered using mpc instead of mp3?
MP3 w/ --alt-preset standard is GREAT - and I use it all the time for encoding things for my friends.
But MP3s still have that pesky little gap problem. Kinda annoying for encoding full CDs. Doing such a thing to Pink Floyd or Chemical Bros. would simply be sacrilege.
Using the OGG format (MPC would work too), and PP's Gapless Output (or XMMS) makes me very, very happy!!!
I also archive my CDs to CDR losslessy using FLAC. I can usually squeeze 2 CDs to 1 CDR this way. Good practice, since CDRs are cheap, CDs get scratched, and I may choose to re-encode later.
But MP3s still have that pesky little gap problem. Kinda annoying for encoding full CDs. Doing such a thing to Pink Floyd or Chemical Bros. would simply be sacrilege.
Using the OGG format (MPC would work too), and PP's Gapless Output (or XMMS) makes me very, very happy!!!
I also archive my CDs to CDR losslessy using FLAC. I can usually squeeze 2 CDs to 1 CDR this way. Good practice, since CDRs are cheap, CDs get scratched, and I may choose to re-encode later.
I am archiving in LPAC as I rip my music, but then I'm not intending to rip all my CDs. In a few years we will all have bigger disks and dvd ram etc, so in the future I'll probably be glad I used LPAC.
Btw, I have the Rumours CD, and have held off buying other Fleetwood Mac CDs... Is it me, or could they do with a remaster?
Btw, I have the Rumours CD, and have held off buying other Fleetwood Mac CDs... Is it me, or could they do with a remaster?
Thanx for the link Citay.
Sam, Rumours sound great to me, but ill give it a better listen next time.
I have not yet looked at any of these other formats yet. I Imagine they need to mature a little in terem of software encoders, decoders organizers. Or no?
If i had a cd without gaps and i converted all the mp3's back to wave 1 day, then glued em together as one big file would that work? Or id there a big loss converting back to wave, or does it have to be done anyways b4 burning 2 CD-audio.
Does it matter what program I use to burn my mp3's to a cd in CD_audio format for listening in an old fashion cd player. I am assuming the encoding of the mp3's is the critical phase and sending it back to Cd_audio is straight forward and I could even let a microsoft product do it??? um well maybe I could let MM Jukebox Do it? O Roxio, or 6 of one a half dozen of the other?
Citay is a --alt-preset extreme better than a cbr256, seems to me from what i have been reading you have to go "all the way" meaning a CBR320 before you exceed the high vbr's is that right?
BTW-Anyone? Is this Helium software any good. I have Music Match for organizng. Finally doesnt crash my system any more. I'm not fond of the player. And its a memory hog but the Music library is so nice. Any way to hack it so i can send my musical selections to winamp? Just kiding. No seriously what do you guys do Scan a directory and click on files while holding down ctrl and drag files to winamp? There has to be a better way without using mmjb.
Sam, Rumours sound great to me, but ill give it a better listen next time.
I have not yet looked at any of these other formats yet. I Imagine they need to mature a little in terem of software encoders, decoders organizers. Or no?
If i had a cd without gaps and i converted all the mp3's back to wave 1 day, then glued em together as one big file would that work? Or id there a big loss converting back to wave, or does it have to be done anyways b4 burning 2 CD-audio.
Does it matter what program I use to burn my mp3's to a cd in CD_audio format for listening in an old fashion cd player. I am assuming the encoding of the mp3's is the critical phase and sending it back to Cd_audio is straight forward and I could even let a microsoft product do it??? um well maybe I could let MM Jukebox Do it? O Roxio, or 6 of one a half dozen of the other?
Citay is a --alt-preset extreme better than a cbr256, seems to me from what i have been reading you have to go "all the way" meaning a CBR320 before you exceed the high vbr's is that right?
BTW-Anyone? Is this Helium software any good. I have Music Match for organizng. Finally doesnt crash my system any more. I'm not fond of the player. And its a memory hog but the Music library is so nice. Any way to hack it so i can send my musical selections to winamp? Just kiding. No seriously what do you guys do Scan a directory and click on files while holding down ctrl and drag files to winamp? There has to be a better way without using mmjb.
Hey boys! what you're talking about archiving?!
The only real way of archiving it's keeping the original CD in a safe place and use a copy for playing or ripping. Besides if you rip at high br generally it's to hear it in your pc (connected to a hifi maybe) and if it's at low br generally it's for streaming or to dnl to some portable and in any case not for archiving. Also if you use lossless you're loosing more than you're winning, since at best you can "archive" just two cd on one cd and today being the cd so very very very cheaper it's of no use to save one every two. It's a real nonsense!
Feel free to flame me as much you want but that's what I think and do.
The only real way of archiving it's keeping the original CD in a safe place and use a copy for playing or ripping. Besides if you rip at high br generally it's to hear it in your pc (connected to a hifi maybe) and if it's at low br generally it's for streaming or to dnl to some portable and in any case not for archiving. Also if you use lossless you're loosing more than you're winning, since at best you can "archive" just two cd on one cd and today being the cd so very very very cheaper it's of no use to save one every two. It's a real nonsense!
Feel free to flame me as much you want but that's what I think and do.
If you've got a burner, it's not a bad idea to backup your cd's on cd-r. But it can take forever.
If a lot of your cd's are badly scratched, make sure you use EAC (www.exactaudiocopy.de) to rip. It's a "secure" ripper - reads every sector twice, and if it doesn't get the same answer it'll do up to 82 reads of the sector to determine the best read. You can configure it to rip in Lame (mp3) or ogg or mpc or whatever.
Unless you want to be able to play your rips on some sort of hardware, I'd recommend you use something other than mp3. As noted, ogg hardware support seems to be upcoming. For straight archiving, if you just want to be able to decode your archived copy and burn the result to a cd-r at some point in the future (and listen to them on the computer in the meantime, of course), you should probably go with MPC --standard or MPC --xtreme. If you stick with mp3, probably your best bet is "--alt-preset extreme". Not cbr 256, certainly, although cbr 320 might be better in spots, especially if you use "--alt-preset insane" (which is an optimized cbr 320, to the best of my knowledge).
Organizing software: I got tired of Media Jukebox (basically same system as music match) and am just using winamp. Much less "bulky" player as far as cpu demands go. I've got my stuff organized in folders and just use the "new list" and "add folder" or "add file" options in winamp. Since I name my files
artist - tracknumber - trackname.ogg, I can use winamp's "sort" function to sort list by filename and have the tracks in the correct order that they were on the album. Winamp 3 is supposed to have a media library feature, but I haven't looked at it yet.
thE BaBaJi - glad you liked the photo. It's of me is actually at sunset, on top of Cloud's Rest in Yosemite NP. Check my photo website (listed under my profile) for more, bigger and better pics.
edit: corrected syntax of MPC and LAME switches
If a lot of your cd's are badly scratched, make sure you use EAC (www.exactaudiocopy.de) to rip. It's a "secure" ripper - reads every sector twice, and if it doesn't get the same answer it'll do up to 82 reads of the sector to determine the best read. You can configure it to rip in Lame (mp3) or ogg or mpc or whatever.
Unless you want to be able to play your rips on some sort of hardware, I'd recommend you use something other than mp3. As noted, ogg hardware support seems to be upcoming. For straight archiving, if you just want to be able to decode your archived copy and burn the result to a cd-r at some point in the future (and listen to them on the computer in the meantime, of course), you should probably go with MPC --standard or MPC --xtreme. If you stick with mp3, probably your best bet is "--alt-preset extreme". Not cbr 256, certainly, although cbr 320 might be better in spots, especially if you use "--alt-preset insane" (which is an optimized cbr 320, to the best of my knowledge).
Organizing software: I got tired of Media Jukebox (basically same system as music match) and am just using winamp. Much less "bulky" player as far as cpu demands go. I've got my stuff organized in folders and just use the "new list" and "add folder" or "add file" options in winamp. Since I name my files
artist - tracknumber - trackname.ogg, I can use winamp's "sort" function to sort list by filename and have the tracks in the correct order that they were on the album. Winamp 3 is supposed to have a media library feature, but I haven't looked at it yet.
thE BaBaJi - glad you liked the photo. It's of me is actually at sunset, on top of Cloud's Rest in Yosemite NP. Check my photo website (listed under my profile) for more, bigger and better pics.
edit: corrected syntax of MPC and LAME switches
I agree it is a little silly to archive all your CDs in a lossless form. It wil be cheaper just to rebuy the ones that die I'm just arching the things I rip at the moment because I'm not really set on a format yet. I've already re-encoded everything about 5 times - AAC, MP3 cbr, r3mix, aps, streaming....
And what if the CD audio format becomes defunt when SACD or DVD-Audio is pushed onto us.
About remasters, they seem to sound lots better to me, although I am a little concerned about the general increase in voulume squishing the dynamic range. I have Arcam seperates for my HiFi.
I'm just arching the things I rip at the moment because I'm not really set on a format yet. I've already re-encoded everything about 5 times - AAC, MP3 cbr, r3mix, aps, streaming....
And what if the CD audio format becomes defunt when SACD or DVD-Audio is pushed onto us.
About remasters, they seem to sound lots better to me, although I am a little concerned about the general increase in voulume squishing the dynamic range. I have Arcam seperates for my HiFi.
QUOTE
I agree it is a little silly to archive all your CDs in a lossless form. It wil be cheaper just to rebuy the ones that die
You're probably right - it might be overkill.
FWIW, once I buy a CD and back it up, I don't use it again. I keep in under lock and key.
If a CD is to be scratched, I want it to be the CDR.
As for the economics of this - well, CDRs are $1 a piece, new CDs are $16 a piece, I can usually get 2 to 1 onto the CDRs... so $0.50 per CD backup vs. $16 to rebuy the CD... (granted, under my care only one or two CDs might get damaged, so overall this is likely not very economical, but it is very anal...).
(Lessee, if I have 100 CDs, to back them up to CDR will run ~$50. In order for this to be economical vs. CD re-purchasing, I will have to damage more than 3 CDs... Hey - y'never know!...)
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.