 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've been using Exact Audio Copy for many years to copy my CD collection to my computer. At this point I have a mix of MP3s (1999 through 2007), OGG (2007-2009), and FLAC. In the past year I have started buying albums on HDTracks because I so rarely utilize the physical album these days anyway.
I am currently in the process of a move. Luckily I only have < 5% of my CD collection in my apartment (holy cow, they are heavy!), the rest are rotting away at my parent's house. Now that I have some space for them, I will probably end up moving them from my parents to my new place. Women that visit will be wowed by my Jerry Goldsmith selection. "Check it out, I have two issues of King Solomon's Mines-- one of them plays back too fast!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Women that visit will be wowed by my Jerry Goldsmith selection. "Check it out, I have two issues of King Solomon's Mines-- one of them plays back too fast!"
Nice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 31, 2014 - 8:52 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
djintrepid
(Member)
|
I have ripped a large number of my CDs onto my computer and listen to them on computer speakers while I'm working. But my main audio system is in my living room--away from my computer. I know I can stream digital files to my living room wirelessly, but it's a hassle. There is one solution I'm considering: the Sony HAPZ1-ES music player system.
http://store.sony.com/hi-res-music-player-with-1tb-hdd-zid27-HAPZ1ES/cat-27-catid-All-Res-Audio
This beast has a built-in 1TB hard drive and can accept and play virtually all types of digital music files. And if 1TB isn't enough, you can daisy chain additional external hard disks. Apparently the unit has the ability to up-convert lossy files and make them sound better. Some of the reviews in the audiophile press have been glowing. The price is steep but, like most tech items, the expense will drop as it becomes more mainstream.
To me this might be the happy medium between being tied to the computer and having access to music in a more traditional listening environment. Any comments?
I'm a bit confused at what you're seeking to achieve: presumably this piece of kit will reside in your living room, attached to your hi-fi system.
It is designed for streaming, presumably, as it has an ethernet wi-fi connection - or is that merely for on-line access to control the music and provide a web-based database (e.g, to identify music on the HDD)?
How do you transfer music onto the HDD? Site it next to your PC to transfer your existing rips and then move the kit to your living room? If so, what about adding music?
I've looked at a few music streamers et al. but admit to not having seen this Sony model.
One thing I have read comments on, though, of which you should consider. HDD kit are basically computers and, as such, have moving parts. We accept PC noise sitting and working ... it may be intrusive if placed in the living room. Even during quiet passages of music the drive may be noticeable. A modification to this type of player is the SSD version (I have no idea whether Sony have introduced this yet) - no moving parts - but then you need connection - or risk wireless - to the music storage on a PC/NAS ... i.e. back to square one.
I'd really think hard (I did!) about whether you want an HDD piece of kit ... or whether you can achieve the same result through other means.
Mitch
The Sony HAP-Z1ES is part of a new generation, and when I say new, I mean it begins this year, of audio playback that converts PCM audio files to DSD before playback. If you are not aware, it was discovered that PCM cannot interpret all of the information read off of CD's or digital audio files, but DSD can. By converting PCM to DSD before playback, you hear a recording that you've heard so many times before in a new way, an incredibly non-digital, analog, organic, however you want to say it way, that will blow your mind. And this is only the first year of it. No other audio playback system has made such a solid impression upon its introduction into the market.
The Sony unit is also not like a computer in terms of noise that we normally hear from a computer. It is very quiet. The Sony units are a steal compared to the high end version, $6000, that is only the DAC itself. That DAC, made by PS Audio is so good that the SACD facility is now using it in their mixing studio.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I really hate all things Apple. Mainly because of their evil attempts to make everything as proprietary as possible...resulting in the problems many of you have had in burning CDs from iTunes and other issues.
What examples do you have regarding this? I have my own relevant observations below and would appreciate insight into understanding what I have overlooked since this appears to be a somewhat prevalent attitude towards Apple. Anyways, I have never had a problem burning an audio CD, MP3 CD, or data CD from iTunes and I’ve used it since its inception. Apple leverages the more-open MPEG-4, Layer3 (AAC) codec instead of the older and more patent-encumbered MPEG-1, Layer 3 (MP3) codec. They also provide a free-of-charge digital jukebox that supports Mac _and_ Windows operating systems and pay for your encoding and decoding licenses for both AAC and MP3. They even had an entire “Rip. Mix. Burn.” advertising campaign that drew the ire of the RIAA and others specifically because they made it easy, legal, and free for people to convert their CDs to AAC and MP3. They also created the first successful online digital music store affording customers, in most cases, the option to buy a single track for a song they like rather than an entire album with one song they like and a bunch of filler they don't. I would like to know how this is evil for the consumers or making things proprietary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeez I'm starting to think that our favourite record labels are wasting their time producing anything more extensive than a plain-fronted CD and a jewel case. And even that may be too much. What a shame... :-(
I hope that the labels would continue producing excellent liner notes and artwork for digital releases should they go down that route. If anything, I hope their digital releases would provide more than what they currently do, e.g., more artwork and liner notes that might not have made it into a CD booklet due to space restrictions, session videos, anything relevant to the release that might not fit in a standard CD jewel case. Also, they could even provide the liner notes and artwork in CD and jewel-case-compatible sizes so people could burn and print them out and create their own physical copy to put on a shelf, read on paper, and listen via CD playback. I am curious to see what the labels produce when they are free from audio (16-bit, 44.1 kHz, ~80 min.) and capacity (booklet must print and compress to fit within plastic jewel case) format restrictions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 31, 2014 - 10:42 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ray Worley
(Member)
|
I really hate all things Apple. Mainly because of their evil attempts to make everything as proprietary as possible...resulting in the problems many of you have had in burning CDs from iTunes and other issues.
What examples do you have regarding this? I have my own relevant observations below and would appreciate insight into understanding what I have overlooked since this appears to be a somewhat prevalent attitude towards Apple. Anyways, I have never had a problem burning an audio CD, MP3 CD, or data CD from iTunes and I’ve used it since its inception. Apple leverages the more-open MPEG-4, Layer3 (AAC) codec instead of the older and more patent-encumbered MPEG-1, Layer 3 (MP3) codec. They also provide a free-of-charge digital jukebox that supports Mac _and_ Windows operating systems and pay for your encoding and decoding licenses for both AAC and MP3. They even had an entire “Rip. Mix. Burn.” advertising campaign that drew the ire of the RIAA and others specifically because they made it easy, legal, and free for people to convert their CDs to AAC and MP3. They also created the first successful online digital music store affording customers, in most cases, the option to buy a single track for a song they like rather than an entire album with one song they like and a bunch of filler they don't. I would like to know how this is evil for the consumers or making things proprietary.
Just a few thoughts from a tech blog:
"The Apple Mac has a small (about 5% market share) but loyal following of users. I never got into using Macs but the users I talk to always marvel at how everything works together. Yes but, everything has an Apple logo on it. You buy it from Apple, and pay a 20% premium price for it.
The iPod and iTunes work the same way...it is a closed, all inclusive experience. People love the iPod but they grumble about not being able to get music from other sources.
Apple builds closed proprietary devices. The larger marketplace wants open devices (computers, music players, phones) built on industry standards, or at least "de facto" standards. They want to be able to buy software, peripherals, and hardware upgrades from a variety of sources. This competition keeps prices low and drives innovation.
Apple users are loyal and dedicated. I expect to hear all sorts of defenses of Apple's approach and how they are way better than the PC and anything Microsoft does. OK, no problem. For some segment of the market (5%) Apple fulfills all their needs beautifully. It just occurred to me today that the way they do it in computers, music players, and phones, is by controlling the whole experience."
OK...maybe "evil" was overkill. But I don't want them "controlling the whole experience". I want to be able to use other people's software on whatever device I use. Another couple of examples include the inability to see Flash on websites with an iPad or the fact that apps for iPhones must be approved by Apple in a rigorous approval process. Granted, you can get around a lot of this stuff by "cracking" your devices but why should you have to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This thread has been a great read, I must say.
And its most interesting to see old CD stalwarts slowly open up to some of the advantages of digital!
For me, I still buy physical CDs, but as soon as they arrived in the post, I rip them and then rarely go near the CD again (apart from that first read of the linear notes as I listen to the album).
Having everything in digital format is just too convenient. I have my stereo connected to my PC and everything gets played through that. I also have a small Sonos speaker in the kitchen, that will play my music over the WiFi network (super handy, and sounds great for the size!)
Its still comforting knowing I have the physical CDs as backup, in case anything happened to my PC or external drives.
Regarding the whole lossless VS lossy debate: if I was only starting to rip my collection now, I might choose to go with a lossless format. But back when I started moving to digital (many years ago at this stage), I’d never had had the room on my PC to store all my CDs in lossless format. Consider for a moment that my first portable music player was a mere 256MBs in size (barely allowing three albums to fit on it in lossy), so going with lossless at the time simply wasn’t an option.
Out of interest, what would the average album size be in lossless?
Also, even though Lucas decided to choose to rip and play his collection through iTunes, I don’t really see the point in laying into Apple so harshly. iTunes is just one of countless pieces of software available to do the job, no better or worse than the rest. I use a funny mix of MediaMonkey (for tagging/organising) and MusicBee (for ripping/playing).
Lastly, I’m not quite sure how to contact people directly on here, but very early on in this thread, Dana Wilcox mentioned a rotating CD unit with a small footprint that houses over 900 CDs. I’d love to see a link to or photo of such, if possible! My CDs are getting a little out of hand in the back bedroom…………
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Folks, here's an iTunes tip.
Whilst I use iTunes to organize my library and edit attributes like art work, etc ...
I also feel the need to know where the files actually are on my computer; and I need them to be in one place so it's easy and assured to back them all up.
iTunes lets you include files from all over the place on your computer, but if you use the ORGANIZE function, it will copy all the active files in your library to the iTunes location. It will still be organized by artist, but all in one place.
If you go one step further (as I do) and make everything a compilation, then organize will put all your albums under just one folder. Then that's the one folder you need to back up.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another iTunes tip.
When I rip a CD, I always rip it lossless and then I create a 320kbps copy from that. So my iTunes library always has two copies of every CD.
I suffix them as follows:
Body Heat (Full score) (no-loss)
Body Heat (Full score) (320kbps)
Body Heat (Intended album) (no-loss)
Body Heat (Intended album) (320kbps)
Body Heat (demo tracks) (no-loss)
Body Heat (demo tracks) (320kbps)
Otherwise if I went to play an album, I'd get every track twice.
Then I set up a smart list with the rule "Album title doesn't contain '(no-loss)'".
Then I set my iPod to sync with that rule, i.e. it automatically synchronizes the iPod with my library but doesn't copy the lossless versions.
(Putting the '(320kbps)' suffix is actually redundant with that rule, but I do it anyway.)
So, I have the music albums separated as I like, I have a lossless copy as a master, a 320kbps copy for the iPod itself, all files in one location for easy backup, and auto-sync so I don't have to manually remember what to update on the iPod.
You may consider this an extravagance, but actually for me it means I've got things well organized.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For me, what iTunes (or other library tool, I'm not religious about this) adds is:
1. An easy user interface for editing file/album attributes, such as the album title, artist, art work.
2. An easy way to automatically sync my library with my iPod.
3. An easy way to sort and list what I've got without having to traverse through directories.
Other than that, though, you're right. A tool like iTunes is really just a window on the files you have on your PC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
