Archival Ripping & Ease of Use

Advertise at AfterDawn.com

Link to us!

Private messages

Compose a private message

List of all updated threads

Threads without replies

Search messages

Monday 10.3.2025 / 21:16

Search AfterDawn Forums:

afterdawn.com > forums > digital audio > audio > archival ripping & ease of use

Browse by topic

Forums

Start a new thread

Archival Ripping & Ease of Use

Jump to:

Posted

Message

iklimon

Junior Member

1. August 2002 @ 11:02

Link to this message

Okay, I've got somewhere between 700-800 CDs. I'd like to rip them all for storage on my computer (Currently I have dual 80 GB HDs, I'm happy to go larger if necessary).

I have two requirements in the format I choose:

1) I want archival quality.
2) I want to be able to make the occasional mixed CD, or to burn a car copy of a CD for my wife.

I will always continue to add to my collection, so I'd prefer a format that will stand the test of time.

So, 320 LAME .mp3s? Ogg Vorbis (Quality 10?) Musepack? What programs are available that would turn the latter two into Audio CDs capable of being played in a normal CD player?

About me: My ears are sensitive enough to hear the difference between 192 and 160 mp3s...but I have a tough time distinguishing between 192 and 256. I'm pretty anal about collecting, so I want to do it right. Right now I'm planning on using EAC with the LAME codec for .mp3s.

But I'm awaiting advice and thoughts regarding Ogg Vorbis and MusePack. I have listened to Ogg Vorbis, but not yet to MusePack.

[ + quote]

cd-rw.org

Senior Member

4 product reviews

2. August 2002 @ 03:51

Link to this message

MP3 is currently the only format that provides you with ease of use when burning music back to audio CDs. I haven't yet seen Vorbis support in major CD-R apps.

Well, you really seem to be keen towards high quality. Personally I could settle for LAME -alt-preset standard or OGG Vorbis -q6. Musepack is currently the highest quality lossy coder, so if max quality is your thing then go for that with settings -extreme (or higher if you prefer, but I really doubt you'll detect any improvement).

[ + quote]

The old school is back. All hail the new http://BitBurners.com !

csayers

Newbie

2. August 2002 @ 06:15

Link to this message

I am in a very similar position to you and have choosen MP3 (EAC LAME --r3mix previously and now --alt standard), it is by far the most supported format so if in future should you decided to purchase a personal player, car player, dedicated hi/fi player etc. the chances are it will only work with MP3 / MP3-CD.

[ + quote]

iklimon

Junior Member

3. August 2002 @ 09:46

Link to this message

How do people generally feel about lossless compression e.g. Monkey's Audio. I tried it out this morning and was able to turn 500 MB of WAV into 300 MB of APE (Monkey's file extension).

I have 700+ CDs to archive, figure an average of 600 MB per CD...I'm looking at roughly 250 GB to archive my music onto HD...about 56 DVDs worth of information.

<flails> I should just get rid of all my CDs and forget about it...or keep them...and just rip MP3s for listening pleasure.

[ + quote]

cd-rw.org

Senior Member

4 product reviews

5. August 2002 @ 04:12

Link to this message

Lossless is great: you lose no quality, save space and Monkey is even pretty fast. On the other hand the compression ratio is very low.

[ + quote]

The old school is back. All hail the new http://BitBurners.com !

Start a new thread

afterdawn.com > forums > digital audio > audio > archival ripping & ease of use


		User name	Password

		Not registered yet? Register here. Lost your password? Click here.