Creating My Lossless Library

[slipperybidness]

You might want to explore it again. There's absolutely nothing about it that sucks for the desires most folks have today for a music player: CD ripping, iTunes Store, Airplay via Airport Express, auto export to iPhone and iPad, Apple Music, Genius Playlist, Music Browser, iTunes Match, CD burning, Radio, metadata and album art retrieval. It's all in there. My Windows 10 executes iTunes flawlessly and your PC will too.

Do you have any streaming options other than Airplay via Airport Express?

 

[slipperybidness]

It was a quite a while ago when I used iTunes last. I can't recall all my reasons for leaving it. One more that just came to mind - when placed on random (my favorite way to listen) it would fixate on the songs that got the most play. One problem - the random algorithm wasn't very random, so it would repeatedly play the same 6 songs like 200+ times. drr!!! Anyway, I am here for all opinions. I read everything you write carefully. But like I say, my memory of why I un-installed iTunes has faded, but the feelings that caused it remain. Sorry if I can't explain further. It's been so many years.

I'm with you on this one.

It likely has improved since I jumped ship. But, the memory of my headaches with iTunes is strong enough that I'm really not interested in it again in the slightest. Nor would I be interested in an iPhone since it pretty much requires iTunes.

 

[joshk03]

So is the format on a CD exactly a wav file?
And I kind of though flac was a wav file inside a zip folder... at least until I saw the bitrate choices.

 

[lovinthehd]

So is the format on a CD exactly a wav file?
And I kind of though flac was a wav file inside a zip folder... at least until I saw the bitrate choices.

If you copy a cd exactly into a wav file it will be 1411 kbps. FLAC is just a lossless codec, you can record mp3 or wav or higher res files....

 

[lovinthehd]

You might want to explore it again. There's absolutely nothing about it that sucks for the desires most folks have today for a music player: CD ripping, iTunes Store, Airplay via Airport Express, auto export to iPhone and iPad, Apple Music, Genius Playlist, Music Browser, iTunes Match, CD burning, Radio, metadata and album art retrieval. It's all in there. My Windows 10 executes iTunes flawlessly and your PC will too. By your comments, I'm guessing you have not experimented with iTunes for over a decade. I'm I right about that bro.

No, never again, no need. I got rid of it the last time I updated laptop, it just made a mess of my ripped files, even more than it did the time before. That was 2 years ago. It doesn't rip FLAC which is far more useful than ALAC, the store format sucks in a few ways, no need for Airplay (altho my avrs support it), the very word genius is a turn-off as it definitely isn't....foobar2000 does more.

 

[slipperybidness]

No, never again, no need. I got rid of it the last time I updated laptop, it just made a mess of my ripped files, even more than it did the time before. That was 2 years ago. It doesn't rip FLAC which is far more useful than ALAC, the store format sucks in a few ways, no need for Airplay (altho my avrs support it), the very word genius is a turn-off as it definitely isn't....foobar2000 does more.

Oh yeah, I remember now, I duplicate track nightmare on iTunes was one of my complaints.

 

[joshk03]

Ah, PCM is the format on the CD. So even WAV isn't exact. Although WAV would probably be more timeless.
Are their any options for metadata storage in a separate file to be a companion to wav?
Edit: yes there are. I might experiment after my computer finishes this rip.

 

[Ponzio]

So is the format on a CD exactly a wav file?

Yes. I'm not aware of any PCM conversion software.

 

[sterling shoote]

Ah, PCM is the format on the CD. So even WAV isn't exact. Although WAV would probably be more timeless.
Are their any options for metadata storage in a separate file to be a companion to wav?
Edit: yes there are. I might experiment after my computer finishes this rip.

Here's the issue with metadata and wav: let's say you've digitized an LP to wav file. Now, let's say you want to import the file to your music player OK you can do that but each of the tracks may be seen as a separate album and none of the tracks will be identified except by a number. This is all because wav does not have the capacity to carry more metadata than album title and artist. Of course, you could create a pdf file to host album info but that's not ever going to connect with the wav file other than by pasting it to the wav file after you have imported it into the music player. Best thing is just set the music player to rip the CD to an ALAC or flac file. Most music players will then read the CDs title and artist; and, look up the track metadata which will be added to the file. This all takes place in less than 4 or 5 minutes per CD. At any rate, wav just does not make any sense today for anything, get over it. I think ALAC is the way to go but flac gets the same result. I do have a few files on flac, they are multi-channel and I do not have them stored in a music player. They are on a thumb drive which allows gapless play which you will not get from your music player no matter what it is if you are going wireless network route via DLNA.

 

[sterling shoote]

No, never again, no need. I got rid of it the last time I updated laptop, it just made a mess of my ripped files, even more than it did the time before. That was 2 years ago. It doesn't rip FLAC which is far more useful than ALAC, the store format sucks in a few ways, no need for Airplay (altho my avrs support it), the very word genius is a turn-off as it definitely isn't....foobar2000 does more.

OK, I get it, you don't like it. Thanks for the detail.

 

[Ponzio]

the latest version of MP3tag Editor can now fully handle all the meta-data, including the comments field and artwork

 

[sterling shoote]

Do you have any streaming options other than Airplay via Airport Express?

Yes, Airport Express in my system is optical S/PDIF at 16/44 to my pre/pro used for wireless from iTunes on computer and devices, i.e. iPhone and iPad; and, I stream from DLNA server (computers) to universal player (OPPO UDP-205) which works well with content other than that which needs gapless play. For example, The Firebird would not be something I would want to stream. I also have and prefer wired connections from computer to pre/pro, which are 1. Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi HD for usb to S/PDIF conversion from computer to pre/pro and 2. computer to usb DAC (OPPO UDP-205) to pre/pro analog input. These wired connections permit any of my music players to get signal to pre/pro.

 

[joshk03]

Yea the metadata into WAV didn't work out. If you get it there it just gets ignored by programs.
My interest in WAV was because it has withstood the test of time already.

I tested on my Ford SYNC system. It plays WAV and 320kbps MP3. It gives an error with FLAC that says "sync can not play protected formats". haha. Good cop-opt message

 

[joshk03]

So I drove across town today listening to my newly encoded music. It sounded very good, but I was not sure volume was consistent across a few albums. Maybe it was in my head. I reviewed my rip logs and see that most tracks peak near 100%, but a few peak at 80.2%. I know I could re-rip with normalize-peaks turned on. But is this smart? I mean, the goal is for the music to feel consistent, and perhaps the peak is a deceiving statistic? Thoughts? What do you guys do?

 

[lovinthehd]

I don't use any sort of volume leveling on creation or playback....volume control is always there if needed. Recorded music levels can vary as there's no particular standard afaik.

ps Never read the definition of peak level as an indicator of overall volume of the track, just the peak level which could be due dynamic range was made use of...or wasn't (lookup loudness wars if you haven't already).

 

[sterling shoote]

So I drove across town today listening to my newly encoded music. It sounded very good, but I was not sure volume was consistent across a few albums. Maybe it was in my head. I reviewed my rip logs and see that most tracks peak near 100%, but a few peak at 80.2%. I know I could re-rip with normalize-peaks turned on. But is this smart? I mean, the goal is for the music to feel consistent, and perhaps the peak is a deceiving statistic? Thoughts? What do you guys do?

OK, what ever music player you use to rip your CDs, remember you are not actually recording, so there is no recording level adjustment you'll be making during the ripping which will allow you to effectively increase or decrease the file's volume as you could possibly do when ripping LP's. However, because your playlists may sound like a roller coaster of volume ups and downs going from songs off one album to another, the music player allows you to match the volume of everything on your playlist. This is a very, very useful feature if your playlist is eclectic, going let's say from classical to popular. In fact if you were to set your volume for
the opening of The Firebird and then forward to Love Lockdown ya might damage your speakers. The volume matching feature is also usually in the same window as crossfade which is useful too if you like your playlists to have the disc jockey effect. One more thing, listening in your car is a very good reason for compression or loudness as music with a high dynamic range will be hard to enjoy on low volume level passages with road noise in competition with the music. It's why classical music is not too compelling while on the road.

 

[Ryan00]

There is only one way you should be ripping your cd’s if you care about quality and want a bit perfect copy.

Use dbpoweramp

Rip them lossless uncompressed NOT on lossless level 8 or 6 or 5 “lossless uncompressed” really no reason not to, hard drives are cheap and most of the time a cd rip is less then 700MB

In dbpoweramp in options use the “secure” setting

This is how I rip all my cd’s and they sound amazing if you need to compress it for some reason you can always do that with the flac.

 

[joshk03]

Use dbpoweramp

I went to give it a try and see it is $40 software. I'm not sure it's $40 better than EAC, is it?

 

[Ryan00]

I went to give it a try and see it is $40 software. I'm not sure it's $40 better than EAC, is it?

All flac, wav, alac, is the container the file sits within,the bits could be the same. Eac (exact audio copy) is a Microsoft file . The reason most people use flac is because most software and hardware will read it and understand it. So is wav better then flac, no.. it’s just the container. Again better in the audio world is a subjective word. I would say flac is the best because all my software will read it and I’ll get the art work or the album covers. Again flac, wav, alac ect.. really has nothing to be with the bit for bit or audio quality again it’s just the containers. It’s how you rip the cd, a lossless Uncompressed where dbpoweramp check bit for bit is the best quality

Edit to me the 40 is worth the money to rip lossless but again it’s very subjective. I think dbpoweramp is the best software for ripping cds

 

[lovinthehd]

All flac, wav, alac, is the container the file sits within,the bits could be the same. Eac (exact audio copy) is a Microsoft file . The reason most people use flac is because most software and hardware will read it and understand it. So is wav better then flac, no.. it’s just the container. Again better in the audio world is a subjective word. I would say flac is the best because all my software will read it and I’ll get the art work or the album covers. Again flac, wav, alac ect.. really has nothing to be with the bit for bit or audio quality again it’s just the containers. It’s how you rip the cd, a lossless Uncompressed where dbpoweramp check bit for bit is the best quality

How do you figure EAC is a Microsoft file?