What format is your main collection encoded in?

Windows just has better support, that's it. When I brose individual files, I see album art on each file and tags work perfectly in Windows Explorer with WMA. It has much more pros than cons over FLAC in my case. I use FLAC for backups/archiving but for actually playback I use WMA.

 

Hmm, interesting. I set windows so it shows album art for each album although all my files have embedded artwork also. I seem to have become a stickler for proper information and artwork as time has went on. To me it takes time to add the artwork and bios..etc but so worth it in the end.
I have pic of band, front of album, back of album, inlay and pic of the CD itself if it is a CD.
I have never found any reason to go to something else over Flac.

I find I am using album player more and more as it has options like being able to show different albums as CD, Vinyl, collections..etc When you look at individual artists the albums can be further organized studio, Live, compilations, unplugged, bootlegs..etc. Nice to be able to organize all those weird albums I have collected over the years. Organization seems to have become very important as my collection has expanded.

 

Keeping an excellent overview of you music library including discogs, artwork etcetera has never been easier in foobar2000, really. A few very nice folks keep improving their WSH Panel Mod scripts in this amazingly helpful thread:

http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=77883

 

320kb/s mp3 + some FLAC

 

Tagging all tracks is important. Makes searching just so much easier. My foobar is rather plain because I find it rather tedious to tweak. The one thing I really like about WMP is that it has pretty much perfect UI out of the box (but I love the ASIO out on Foobar way too much so...).

 

Foobar takes some work but once you get it down it is not that hard to work with.
As I said, lately I have been using Album player more and more for various tasks such as organization adding bios, band pics. Filling in info more thoroughly. Very in depth for such task, well many apps are really good for this type of tasks.

 

CBR is mostly used for archaic players that does not properly support VBR back then.
These days, they're simply the only choice for streamcasting.
CBR mode, that is, not necessarily the MP3 format, as people are slowly transitioning to AAC.

-q 0 setting, to be honest, is a waste of time.
-q 2 is the best bet, and I doubt most people would know the difference between using -q 0 and -q 2.
Of course, some people would argue about that 'peace of mind' from using -q 0, but personally it's not worth the extra encoding time, especially when I transcode lots of albums from my lossless archive.

A user has made an 'extension' (of some sort) to LAME 3.99.5.
The 3.99.5y has a -V0+ argument which would sound better than -V 0 in most samples with pre-echo problems.
Of course, at the expense of a slightly bigger bitrate.

 

80% FLAC (compression 8), and some MP3 ranging from 128-320 kbps. 90% of all my music collection are ripped from CD, rest I found it from 4Shared (lol). All played by using jetAudio (full version)with BBE effect enabled

 

Most of it is in .MLP but some are in 24/192 WAV's

 

670GB of FLAC files ripped using EAC

I do the tagging using Tag and Rename and then use Mediamonkey to tag the artwork to each track

I then use DBPowerAmp Batch Converter to convert the FLACs to high bitrate VBR MP3s for use on my ipod when at the gym

All my FLACs and MP3s are backed up online using Sugarsync (£4.50 a month)

Used 1.4TB of online storage so far. Bargain.

 

removed the spam.

On topic, I converted my entire CD collection to FLAC.
I copied them off, put the CD's away for safe keeping. This way god forbid, I ever loose my Flac collection which is currently in a RAID 5 array I can rip them again. I buy new CD's rip them and put them away.

I have been using Mp3Tag for quickly adding information. I have a bunch of custom scripts to make everything easier. I added in Discogs pone scripts which finds a great deal of information on almost any album. Even very obscure EP's or other albums you would never find info for anywhere else. Mp3Tag is a very simple app, but you can expand it and get it to do whatever you want with scripts.

As I may have mentioned I am a stickler for proper tagging, album art and keeping things organized. You have to with such a large collection.

 

Yep, when I buy a CD these days the only time it gets played is in my car on the way home. Other than that it gets ripped, and put away on my cd shelf for safe-keeping.

I'm also a stickler for proper tagging and cover art. You have to be to keep a sizeable library under control.

 

that is just completely and totally absurd, this is the absolute stereotype (forgive the pun) cliche Parody of an 'audiophile' records vinyl to some losless HI res blah de blah format? can't listen to CD's?

come on man! a jokes a joke!

 

I agree.
I'm using the same DAC and amplifier as TruMutton but my speakers are different.
I find that vinyl rips lack dynamic headroom, are missing detail and are noisier, they sound flat and boring in comparison.
CDs and hi res audio sound so much better and have tons more detail, its no illusion.

My feeling is that the tweeters I am using (ribbon) are forgiving of some of the treble harshness that 'some' CDs exhibit, but it doesnt explain the lack of headroom and detail on vinyl rips.

Different systems give different results, then theres personal preference as well.
I'm no newb to music, I was a pro singer from age 7 and played in multiple orchestras, and have a degree in electronic engineering, so I'm not someone who doesnt understand what goes on under the hood.
My friends also agree with what I am saying when they hear my system.
They are like the general public in their ability to resolve music detail, yet they hold the same opinion, so its not just down to my perception.

TruMutton is absolutely anal about vinyl and there are many others with the same opinion.
I dont doubt what they are hearing with their systems, but they will not accept what we hear on ours.
Thats why I avoid this kind of discussion generally because they get pretty arsey about it.
Now its my turn

ps I was a big vinyl fan until I got this system.
Now I am an absolute fan of CDs, with this system.

 

The problem with vinyl is that to get the most out of it you have to sink in serious cash. The cart/needle alone for a mid-range analogue setup could be upwards of $1000, not to mention the turntable & phono amp, heavy isolation plinth etc. It just gets out of hand really fast, however when it is done right it sounds magical.

I have a low end vinyl setup and a kickass digital setup and enjoy both but the digital gets played 99.9% of the time due to ease of use and how it fits in to my lifestyle and the fact that these days I can buy lossless FLAC albums for most of the music I'm interested in online for a fraction of the cost of new vinyl. Of course hi-res downloads are expensive and few and far between still but they will get there too eventually.

 

I have a low end Rotel turntable (with an upgraded cartridge), and it sounds very nice. I don't mind the scratching sounds, it's not very audible on new vinyls. I prefer my digital rig though. Making vinyl rips doesn't make sense to me, but if people like it, go for it. A rip doesn't capture the sound that's coming from a turntable IMO, it takes away the charm of it too.

 

mp3: 55Gb
flac: 81GB
wave: 81GB

 

Why don't you compress down the Wave to FLAC, you would get much better file sizes. *.wav uses alot of space for no information. Unless there is a reason you want them as Flac.
Just a suggestion.

 

Not all vinyl sounds better than CD, but to my ears, alot of the music that I like still does.

If you disagree, it's not the end of the world and I fully respect your opinion.

As per my above reply, I do accept what you hear on yours.

The only thing arsey about it is when people do not respect other people's opinions.

There are many theoretical explanations why vinyl can sound better than CD.

1. Although vinyl can indeed be noisy, alot of it isn't as noisy as many people tend to believe it is. Far from it, in fact. Most of the noise of vinyl is below 500 Hz, and below 400 Hz on most audiophile pressings. The loud music effectively masks out the noise, so it only becomes a problem with some types of music, and only in the quietest parts. For music where this problem does not occur, the noise floor of vinyl is (in pure terms of audibility and not in terms of measurements) not worse, nor better, than that of CD.

2. The annoying clicks and pops of vinyl can be manually removed using software. It is a very time consuming process and it requires some skill, but if done properly, the end result is very often more than worth it (even, if the price of the ADC that's used to digitize the music is less than a few hundred euro).

3. Relative dynamics matter more than dynamics. It is often claimed that CD, as a medium (i.e. when ignoring the differences caused by varying mastering processes applied by the mastering engineer) has greater dynamic range than vinyl. This is correct, but measurements will show that vinyl usually has greater relative dynamics.

4. Vinyl has MUCH more measurable distortion than CD. Again, this is correct, but the human hearing system is non linear on alot of levels. Some types of distortion are euphonic, meaning they are perceived as "pleasant". Other types of distortion are barely even noticeable unless the measurable amount of them becomes really big. Just to give you an example of how extremely audible even the very smallest digital artifacts can be, in a 16-bit audio channel, people can clearly hear the difference between TPDF and MBIT+ dither even though it's 90 dB down.

5. Filters. All digital equipment uses them. Aliasing filters, reconstruction filters, they all have an impact on the signal, the side effects of which can affect the audible band of the spectrum. The 44.1 kHz samplerate of CD is nowhere nearly enough to push those audible side effects out of the audible range of human hearing (even, if the filters are minimum phase aka "apodizing" instead of linear phase).

I am not anal, but my ears are...

:bigsmile:

 

My files are all over the place, quality wise. Recently, I've been trying to replace all of my "the before time" mp3s (64-320kbs) to flac. What I'm finding out is... it's a pain!
It sure is worth it, though.